Hawaii vs. LSU
by 54b on Dec 2, 2007 3:28 PM CST
Email
PrintI think it goes without saying that no matter who they choose to play for the title, very few of us will be satisfied with the result (even more so than in past years when at least one team in the BCS Title game seemed truly dominant).
So if a play-off isn't possible and I had a vote...I'd go with Hawaii vs. LSU.
Like a few other BONers have on this site, I think Tarhorn makes a good point on Hawaii's behalf in his response to the "Why Not Kansas?" diary below and I'd like to elaborate upon it.
It's not so much that I think Hawaii and LSU are clearly the two best teams, but given the current rules of the BCS, what those two teams accomplished on the field, and what they did within in their control, I think they are the most deserving.
OU would be a close 3rd and USC, Kansas, Mizzou, and tOSU would tie for 4th based on the combination of how many losses they had, who they lost to, and SOS.
If OU had only lost to Coloardo or Tech, but not both, I think it's OU over LSU no question. But LSU's two losses coupled with who they did beat give them a slight edge in my opinion. It also didn't help that OU beat Mizzou twice instead of beating Mizzou and then an undefeated KU team which I think probably would have vaulted them above LSU IMO.
No doubt you can make a strong argument against Hawaii's strength of schedule, but I put a premium on going undefeated and so would the BCS poll if only Hawaii was in a BCS conference.
You might say Hawaii never would have gone undefeated in a BCS conference like they said about Boise State last year, but I think we can only deal with what we actually know as you can make assumptions to the contrary against any team in the mix right now.
Bottom line, I've seen too much mediocre football and too much parity this season to dismiss Hawaii. If they can put tOSU in the title game based on their resume, I think they can just as easily put Hawaii in it too.
If I hadn't seen App State beat Michigan, Stanford beat USC, Colorado beat OU, Pitt beat WVU, etc and there were a lot more 1 loss BCS confernce teams, I'd exclude Hawaii no question. But given our current winner take all, 1 game BCS Championship format, I think you have to give them a shot to prove it on the field.
No doubt if Hawaii had slipped up and lost even 1 game, they wouldn't even be in this conversation right now. But they got it done and did it with many of the same bumps and bruises (i.e. lost thier starting QB for a game) as everyone else.
If Hawaii loses the BCS game they do go to by a healthy margin, I'll readily admit that I was wrong, but if they do win, even if it's by one point, it will surely strengthen my resolve (as well as that of many others I'd imagine).
Just my take. Thoughts?
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hawaii sucks
They will get blown out in their BCS game. Being a night owl has allowed me too watch too many Hawaii games. They are extremely lucky to be undefeated at this point, and their schedule is a total joke (not tOSU schedule joke, but a real funny joke).
gotta note this
and link to it after the Hawaii's game :>
Elaborate, please
Obviously, most of the voters feel the same way you do, but I don't think it's enough to simply say they suck.
Admittedly, I probably haven't watched them as much as you, but from what I've seen in the 3 or 4 games I've watched, they have a prolfic offense that seems to put points on the board in bunches and an opportunistic defense.
They may not be world beaters but I don't think you can dismiss them on luck and SOS alone.
Who in the Top 10 hasn't won some close games and had a few bounces go their way?
Is it inferior talent, bad coaching, technique...why do you say they suck?
by 54b on Dec 2, 2007 4:52 PM CST up reply actions
They are one dimensional
They are only good in the air. They rushing suck. Their defense is not good against the run or the pass. I think their best game was that Boise state game which you probably have seen, that seemed like an exceptional night for Hawaii, don't judge them on that game. Anyways, a team with balanced offense and a smart defensive coordinator should manhandle them. We will see soon!:)
The games I saw were...
against Boise State, San Jose State, Nevada and Washington.
They were awesome start to finish in the Boise State game, but actually, looked quite pedestrian at times against Nevada (Brennan was hurt), San Jose State (rain soaked field) and Washington (slow start).
But the key for me was when they needed it, they could turn it on to win.
So maybe Georgia does steamroll them, but I'll be watching because I don't know that this Hawaii teams has hit it's top gear.
We'll see.
by 54b on Dec 4, 2007 9:22 AM CST up reply actions
Why Hawaii should be left out
In order to win championships, a team has to have a great defense, be able to run the football, and be able to stop the run. Someone posted a diary a while back which noted that the last 5 or 6 national champions were all in the top 10 in defense and 3 or 4 of these teams ranked outside the top 10 in total offense. If I was a voter and had to choose between Ohio State, LSU, and Hawaii, then Hawaii would get left out and here's why. In total defense, Ohio State is #1, LSU is #3, and Hawaii is #33. In rushing defense, Ohio State is #3, LSU is #14 (thanks to McFadden), and Hawaii is #39. In rushing offense, LSU is #12, Ohio State is #20, and Hawaii is #113. Ohio State and LSU are much better than Hawaii in the statistical categories that are the most important in terms of winning a championship and those two teams produced those results against a much stronger schedule than Hawaii.
by jthorn on Dec 2, 2007 6:47 PM CST reply actions
Solid analysis, thanks
That makes a lot of sense...I'm not a big stat guy and you can usually throw them out the window once the game starts, but Hawaii may very well get exposed if they can't get Georgia and Knowshon Moreno off the field.
But as UTHorns says below, they deserve a chance and they'll get it.
If I had to bet, I'd probably put the money on Georgia, but how I will be rooting for Hawaii. If the Warriors can win against what many consider is the hottest team in the land, oh would that be a fun shit burger for the BCS.
Easily the most interesting game of all this bowl season outside of maybe the title game.
Unrelated, but very true...Mizzou got jobbed. No way they should have been passed over for KU and the fact that Illinois got the nod, a team Mizzou beat, that's insult to injury.
by 54b on Dec 2, 2007 9:28 PM CST up reply actions
Mizzou got a sandpaper reach around
Tigers -"Oh look, Big XII title game, our program has made it back"
Illini -"Fail"
by anonyMoose on Dec 3, 2007 2:00 AM CST up reply actions
I'm putting my money on Georgia
Does Hawaii deserve a chance (either all the marbles or one of the BCS games)? Yes, in all likelihood.
But outside of Boise St who did they beat? They struggled far too much with teams like La Tech, San Jose St, Nevada, Washington. Sorry one game, maybe two can be forgiven for the big boys, but when Hawaii struggles to the very end to beat those kinds of teams? Hell no.
And here's hoping Georgia lays a 'behind the woodshed, piss-poundin' on KU. You want to talk about a joke - KU has no business in a BCS game. They did not beat one ranked team and for that matter didn't even beat one of those teams in the "other receiving votes" category. So Missouri lost two games but it was the same opponent. Besides, Missouri finished ranked higher, had a higher BCS score, and for practical purposed beat the shit out of KU. Missouri should be playing Georgia.
Re:
I agree, in this season, might as well throw Hawaii in there and see what they can do. Of course, the BCS powers-that-be would've never let it happen.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
