Look, I don’t like scheduling 1-AA teams AT ALL – and my school has scheduled its share, for sure. I’m all for outlawing those games all together, or maybe not allowing any team that scheduled one to play in a BCS bowl, which would wipe it out from the big-boy schools (where is is most rediculous) all together.

But teams in the upper half of the major confrences couldn’t even play 8 conference games without having at least 4 practically guaranteed wins. Hell, the Big T(elev)en only has 3 ranked teams in the whole league.

I would also like to see the mid majors be split off somehow, because those teams really have no national championship they can even play for. Perhaps, if we ever get a D1A playoff, we can have a D1A NIT for those schools — NIT games in the afternoon and Big Boy tourny at night.

But if we cut off scheduling of CUSA, MAC, WACC etc. by BCS conference schools, then I hope you like the idea of the national champion having a 0.750 winning percentage, which is what you’ll get. Maybe that would be best. I don’t really know.

And : my 12 year old knows the rules better than officials blah, blah, blah, I coach a kids’ football team better than NFL coaches, blah, blah, blah.

The only good thing you can say about him is that Peter King is worse.

#19: I see no problem with that scenario.

If I were supreme potentate of college football, I’d say that any game against a 1AA team can’t count towards bowl eligibility. I think the only conference who handled the recent expansion of the schedule the right way was the Pac 10. Making every school play an extra-conference game rather than a cupcake was the correct decision. It does make the league LOOK worse in the conference pissing matches though since 1/2 the teams have to pick up a loss rather than them all just crushing cupcakes (except for the occasional HOT HOT HOT upset of course).

blah… don’t blitz… blah… Science fiction bitch and moan… blah… go for it on fourth down.. blah… cheerleader… blah… use words like animadversion that ensure I never get laid.. blah.. repeat ad infinitum… blah.. cash ESPN check.

Clip this boys and girls so you can do something more interesting with your lives like watch paint dry.

In an ideal world, there wouldn’t need to be a rule, just athletic directors concerned with making sure each game is competitive. It would be kind of fun to have an “X losable game” rule even if X is a low number just because the bigger teams are going to have to label some of their games not losable and that label would have to be sanctioned by the NCAA. That’s got to be some locker room motivation for the underdogs.

Anyway, Paterno tends to avoid RUTSing if at all possible, and I don’t think that the FIU game is a particularly good example. It’s not like Paterno suddenly invoked the spirit of Spurrier — four of the last five TD drives were less than 40 yards.

A good data point in this discussion is the 2005 Illinois game. Penn State didn’t throw a single pass in the second half.

In all seriousness, and this is not an “in all seriousness” blog, so it’s pretty moronic to post something serious in the comments section of of said blog, but PSU doesn’t run up the score. Thus the reason RUTS did a good job naming his blog. Its the reason they lost the MNC to Nebraska in the 90’s (see Indiana game).

The fact that the score was lopsided has a lot to do with FIU being an airport and not a college. Besides that, they might be the 150th best football team in the ncaa this season, maybe. Three QBs and like 47 running backs played during the second half of that game for PSU, you can only do so much to not score.

If “gimmick scheduling” were outlawed and your “10 losable games” rule instated, then who would mid-majors ever play? They would have to become a new 1AA and the current 1AA would be 1AAA.

Near as I can tell, Gimmick scheduling would be the football factory schools scheduling so many weak opponents that they are guaranteed a bowl game. Of course college football fans don’t call that gimmick scheduling. They just call it scheduling. That’s one of the few places where I really agree with him on college football. I’d still like to see a college football world where each team plays 10 or more games per year that they have a reasonable shot at losing.

He’s doubly an ass this week for thinking that Mike Price is a job-bouncing opportunist. Aside from the Alabama mess, he’s never coached anywhere less than seven years (not counting UTEP, 2004-present). The strip club fiasco didn’t exactly make him look good, but it had nothing to do with job-hopping either.

Oh, and fuck Mitch Albom in the eye.