Cave Man, I'm not trying to sling mud here as that's really not my style. I never intended to call you a fool specifically, although after reading my post I can see how that came across. It was a poor choice of words, but I was simply trying to use "you" as a generalization. I wasn't trying to insult you personally, so for my part in that I apologize.
But I certainly don't apologize for my argument.
You say the Utah/Oregon St/USC is the "only factual piece there is". If this is to be the case then shouldn't we take all the facts in to consideration, which include the game location and conference details? As we all know those circumstances make a huge difference in the outcome of a game. So how do they come in to play with this comparison?
In regards to Schlabach's article...
Obviously he is attacking the legitimacy of the non-BCS, but a lot of what he said is true. The only point that I disagreed with him on flat-out was at the end. Both Boise State and Utah would defeat Arkansas.
But I certainly don't apologize for my argument.
You say the Utah/Oregon St/USC is the "only factual piece there is". If this is to be the case then shouldn't we take all the facts in to consideration, which include the game location and conference details? As we all know those circumstances make a huge difference in the outcome of a game. So how do they come in to play with this comparison?
In regards to Schlabach's article...
Obviously he is attacking the legitimacy of the non-BCS, but a lot of what he said is true. The only point that I disagreed with him on flat-out was at the end. Both Boise State and Utah would defeat Arkansas.