Vanderbilt disappoints
They get that 6th win and then drop their last two games to two rather anemic teams: Tennessee and Wake Forest. Yikes.
What happened? Back to Earth is what happened.
They get that 6th win and then drop their last two games to two rather anemic teams: Tennessee and Wake Forest. Yikes.
What happened? Back to Earth is what happened.
This entry was posted on Monday, December 1st, 2008 at 2:26 pm and is filed under Sports. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Design by Sunaryo Hadi. A Couple Things is proudly powered by
WordPress
Entries (RSS)
and Comments (RSS).
31 queries. 1.242 seconds.
December 1st, 2008 16:00
In a greatly superior conference, the Commodores finished a game better than the lowly UVA…Ga Tech fans all over the country are cursing that awful team.
December 1st, 2008 16:01
Pretty pathetic when you compare Vandy to UVA in a year when UVA didn’t have a QB. Would it make you feel better to compare Vandy to Notre Dame next?
December 1st, 2008 17:31
Notre Dame had a better year than UVA.
December 1st, 2008 17:37
p.s. Vandy’s QB separated his shoulder halfway through the season…prior to that the Commodores were 5-0 so don’t give me this UVA didn’t have a QB crap.
December 1st, 2008 19:34
Hahhaha Notre Dame is better than UVA, I love it. I’ll tell you one thing though, Vandy would kill and maim to get Charlie Weiss.
Seriously, why did Vandy drop such a big turd at the end of the season? Could have been 8-4… that looks a whole lot better than 6-7.
December 1st, 2008 19:44
haha, vandy has a great coach who fits very well at a conservative southern school…Charlie Weiss is a fat cheater who is no different than Belicheat (other than the fact that he is a loser).
Notre Dame will be going to a bowl, UVA will not. And again, the reason Vandy stunk down the stretch was uncertainty with their QB situation…they lost their ability to score. With that said, I see a bowl victory and a 7-6 finish.
December 1st, 2008 19:45
Talk about being biased. You “see” a bowl victory without knowing who the opponent will be. Gotcha.
December 1st, 2008 19:47
There are only three possibilities…I like their chances against Tulsa…an ACC foe could be more difficult…perhaps a UNC.
December 1st, 2008 19:49
Nevertheless, only a partisan hack pronounces victory before the opponent is named.
December 1st, 2008 20:09
You are so stupid, when you know that it will be 1 of 3 opponents, you can make predictions based on each scenario… (not to mention you predicted a loss before the opponent has been named).
December 1st, 2008 20:14
I don’t “see” anything, like you do, but I do know that when a team drops its last 2 to losers, it ain’t playing all that well. A Rhodes Scholar one does not need to be to figure that one out. You have no basis for saying that Vandy will win a bowl game other than you want them to. Any reasonable observer would note that this team sucks right now.
December 1st, 2008 20:20
Well we agree, you are no Rhodes Scholar, because you don’t base your analyses on anything legit…I, on the other hand look at Vandy, look at their potential opponents, and believe that there is a decent chance that they will finish with a W.
December 1st, 2008 20:22
And what I’m telling you is that you’ve let your emotion tinker with your reasoning, son. Wanting something does not make it more likely to happen.
December 1st, 2008 20:24
Offer me an analysis as to why Vandy will lose to either a Tulsa or a UNC.
December 1st, 2008 20:54
Yankees Fan: The problem with Vanderbilt is that they are a pathetic institution.
December 1st, 2008 21:25
Evidence? Anything to back that up? Which institution do you support?
December 2nd, 2008 10:22
Why should Vandy Gonads provide evidence when you’re the one certain about the outcome of games where the opponent and game itself are both unknown?
December 2nd, 2008 12:12
I have evidence to back up my prediction, dumb a**
December 2nd, 2008 12:14
As does Mr. Gonads. Both of you are using your own mental perceptions as evidence. His are just as worthy as yours.
December 2nd, 2008 12:28
You are an idiot…I’ve already mentioned that there are only three potential teams they can play, and thus you can do a head to head analysis in each scenario…you and Gonads deserve each other.
December 2nd, 2008 12:31
Pray tell, who is your authoritative source for these “only three potential teams,” by the way?
December 2nd, 2008 12:54
The 6/7 place team in the SEC can only get an ACC team or a CUSA team. There are two potential ACC teams available, and one CUSA…you can look it up on any college football website and do the math yourself if you’d like.
December 2nd, 2008 13:04
Give me the website that breaks down the 3 opponents with certainty.
December 2nd, 2008 14:40
Is that how you analyze…look at what someone else said, and then adopt that thinking as yours? I looked at each team’s schedules, what they have done over the last three games (as you have pointed out Vandy is on a down-slide), what their strengths and weaknesses have been over the second half of the season, if they’ve had any injuries, etc.
December 2nd, 2008 14:42
All I’m trying to figure out is how you have come up with these three teams as the only possibilities. The websites I am looking at say otherwise. So, what’s your source?
After all, your whole argument here is that because there are three, and only three teams, you can predict a Vandy victory. It’s pretty important that you have your facts down correct, right counselor?
December 2nd, 2008 14:52
I’d like to know what websites you are looking at? ESPN, CBS.SPORTSLINE, CNN.SI, they all have Vandy against either a low end ACC team or a high end CUSA team.
December 2nd, 2008 14:56
So you link to a website that refutes your own point. I love it!!
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/stewart_mandel/12/01/week14-bowl-projections/index.html?eref=T1
Dec. 31 Music City: Virginia Tech (ACC) vs. Vanderbilt (SEC)
That, right there, is CNN/SI’s bowl prediction for Vandy. Note that it isn’t Tulsa or UNC.
Game. Set. Match. (Both for this discussion and Vandy’s chances. They aren’t gonna beat VA Tech. Nor will BC.)
December 2nd, 2008 15:12
I said three teams dumbass…who ever said that Va Tech wasn’t the other ACC team?
December 2nd, 2008 15:13
With that said, the emphasis is on the ACC v. SEC, not the team, because if you haven’t been paying attention, VA Tech and BC are both in a game to see who gets a BCS bowl…neither will play Vandy…if it’s in the ACC, it is either UNC or Clemson….I’d be happy to make a wager.
December 2nd, 2008 15:15
And what about Clemson? Another of your links, ESPN, is predicting Vandy-Clemson: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowlprojection?season=2008&week=14
December 2nd, 2008 15:16
Oh I see, so now it is 4 teams that are possible.
Maybe next time you post it will be 5.
December 2nd, 2008 18:29
? can you count…I don’t agree with Va Tech because they will not be a low enough seed out of the ACC, but every single formula is either the ACC or the CUSA. Three teams I see as possibilities…Tulsa, UNC, or Clemson…again, you want to make a wager?
December 8th, 2008 10:13
As I correctly predicted, BC did not beat Va Tech. And Vandy won’t beat BC.
December 8th, 2008 18:40
Unfortunately for BC, their starting QB went down with a broken collarbone two weeks ago…it was pretty clear that Dominique Davis didn’t have what it takes from the beginning. I don’t think Vandy will be much of a test for BC, but without Crane, perhaps the Dores stand a chance.
This is a major insult to a team like BC…the bowl system is an absolute joke.
December 8th, 2008 19:49
Why is it an insult to a team like BC? Their QB went down and they sucked afterwards. Thems are the breaks. The BCS is supposed to feel sorry for these teams and send them to bowls they don’t deserve to be in so they get smoked? How would that be “fair” to the other team involved?
December 8th, 2008 20:01
Are you kidding? They are 9-4…they went to the ACC Championship, and won their last three games to get their despite their QB going down. This bowl game is designated the 5,6,7 place team in the ACC. What an effing joke! It’s all about money, not about which team earns the spot. At the worst, they are #3 in the ACC, and that’s debateable.
December 8th, 2008 20:08
Welcome to the real world, my naive little friend.
December 8th, 2008 20:11
So then you are admitting that your previous post was 100% wrong and based on no fact whatsoever, and conceding that BC’s placement in this bowl is b.s., based on money, and the bowl system is crap.
December 8th, 2008 20:45
No, I’m saying that it isn’t an insult to send BC to a less glamorous bowl when they lose the ACC Championship game and don’t have a starter QB.
I’m also saying that I’ve known for a long time that college football is 99% about the money so it doesn’t surprise me in the least that BCS would do what makes the BCS schools the most $$$.
December 8th, 2008 20:47
Doesn’t make it okay.
December 8th, 2008 21:28
You seem to get caught up on these questions of “right” and “wrong” a lot. Why?
December 9th, 2008 16:03
Do you not strive to be better? You should always ask if the system is achieving what is “right.” That’s why people are calling for a playoff.
December 9th, 2008 16:05
Sure, but these teams and the administration have to work within the structure that is already in place. I don’t think they should try to be “fair” when they’re dishing out bowl assignments.
December 9th, 2008 16:11
But they advertise as if they do….either actually do what you say you are going to do, or stop advertising that way and make it solely about the money…yup, that’s what College sports is supposed to be about.
December 9th, 2008 16:14
They don’t advertise it is going to be fair. They advertise the opposite: it’s going to be objective. That’s why they have the computer system in the first place. It replaces the old system where the coaches voted and that was that. This brings objectivity into the mix. Objectivity is definitely not synonymous with fair.
December 9th, 2008 16:16
How is it objective that BC is playing in a bowl that is designated for either the 5th, 6th, or 7th place time?
December 9th, 2008 16:20
Easy. They lost the championship game, they don’t have a QB, their conference record is the same as three other teams (who had tougher schedules and better quality wins).
December 9th, 2008 16:26
Um, they do have a QB who lead them to the conference championship game (although I do believe that Crane would have given them a better shot at beating VT as they beat them earlier in the season). They lost to Ga. Tech and Clemson (who barely got to 6-6 and still got a better bowl than them). You don’t like BC, so your bias shows, but it is reprehensible. And your precious BCS standings system shows it…only Va. Tech and Ga. Tech finished ahead of them. Face it, they were screwed by a system that only cares about money, and unless they get an automatic bid to a BCS bowl, they will continue to be screwed.
December 9th, 2008 16:31
They lost to Georgia Tech, a good team.
They lost to Clemson, a bad team (as you yourself note).
They lost to UNC, a terrible team (as you yourself note).
They lost to Virginia Tech, a good team.
Oh, and when BC was playing cream puffs like Kent State, Clemson was playing top-25 Alabama their first game. Strength of schedule matters, my friend.
December 9th, 2008 16:37
Where does it matter? Not in the BCS which you said is the objective measurement.
And UNC and Clemson aren’t bad teams…they just aren’t teams that finished ahead of BC. Notice that Ga. Tech lost to Virginia and UNC (one bad team and one okay team); Va. Tech. lost to BC, as well as a tough out of conference loss to East Carolina. The computer puts them ahead of all these teams, and yet the SUBJECTIVE bowl system leaves them out because they don’t bring in enough revenue….it’s not fair to the kids who work their a**es off all year to have it come down to which team makes more money.
December 9th, 2008 16:44
What are you talking about? You don’t think that strength of schedule makes a difference in the Harris poll?
Dude, UNC got crushed by NC State *at home*. You’re just making up in your head who is a good team and who isn’t. You have to actually, you know, look at the results.
December 9th, 2008 16:47
You like using statistics when it is in your favor only…BC is the third place team in the ACC!!! ENOUGH SAID!!!
December 9th, 2008 16:48
And your basis for why the #3 team in the ACC deserves more than what BC got is what?
December 9th, 2008 16:50
Why does UNC get a bowl bid against the 8-4 West Virginia team that is greatly superior to Vandy?
Clemson against the 8-4 Nebraska team that is better than Vandy?
Georgia Tech gets LSU?
Miami gets UCAL????
December 9th, 2008 16:50
Teams below them got better bowls because they bring more revenue….it is a fact.
December 9th, 2008 16:55
Dude, you’re just embarrassing yourself and Vandy at the same time. Nebraska played a creampuff schedule and didn’t beat a ranked team all year. West Virginia beat a ranked team but lost to East Carolina and Colorado for crying out loud. Vandy, on the other hand, beat Auburn and SC, two good teams.
Maybe if you gave your own team a little more credit you’d realize that BC isn’t playing the scrub you claim they are.
December 9th, 2008 17:02
haha, no…BC is playing a scrub. Vandy was 5-0…there record? 6-6. Losses to Duke, Wake Forest, Tennessee, Miss. State….it makes me sick to think that this is an historically good season for Vandy…the woes of being a Commodore fan
December 9th, 2008 17:03
With that said, GO DORES!!!
December 9th, 2008 17:05
Geez, at least the truth comes out about how you feel about Vandy.
By the way, you do realize that the bowl that BC is going to is ranked higher, and is more prestigious, than these other bowls UNC and Clemson are going to, right?
How do you know BC feels slighted. Have you talked to the players?
December 9th, 2008 17:07
….I didn’t know that….:)
I feel slighted on their behalf, and that’s all that matters on this blog.