[oman]

[quote author=oman link=topic=5919.msg43682#msg43682 date=1337281106]
You weren't a little disappointed when you found out we would play VaTech?

Every pundit out there who had anything to say about that game was picking VT, so it's not like anyone thought they were an inferior opponent, except you, of course. I lo-o-o-o-ved the beatdown but to imply it was a foregone conclusion is revisionist.
[/quote]

I don't remember it quite like you, and I'll be open about some bias I have against football north of the Mason Dixon and east of the Mississippi.

First off, I didn't say it was a foregone conclusion.  Second of all, it's absolutely revisionist theory to say that everyone was picking VT.  VaTech was ranked 13th going into that game with two early loses and coming out of a weak conference.  Stanford (ranked 5th) was only favored by a little because the Pac10, as usual in recent years, was deemed soft.  (In AP, bring them two places closer at 12th and 6th, respectively.)

You are also forgetting the griping about the game being on the other side of the country and even some carping about the Rose Bowl.

There will be lots of discussion on a national level lamenting the thought that Stanford fans wouldn't buy enough tickets to warrant a more desirable slot against a better team in the Sugar Bowl or Fiesta Bowl, and griping throughout Cardinal Nation that an obscure clause in the BCS contract kept the team from its rightful place in the Rose Bowl.

http://www.gomightycard.com/orange-bowl/

I can't speak for everyone, but I specifically remember people thinking we would have been better Fiesta Bowl draws (Oklahoma rematch) and either Ohio State or Arkansas in the Sugar (all of these top 10 teams and all based on rankings bigger challenges than VaTech.)

Ohio State and OU and "bigger" opponents from bigger conferences than VaTech.  When they are ranked higher, they are simply better post season opponents.

[oman]

[quote author=oman link=topic=5919.msg43682#msg43682 date=1337281106]
You weren't a little disappointed when you found out we would play VaTech?

Every pundit out there who had anything to say about that game was picking VT, so it's not like anyone thought they were an inferior opponent, except you, of course. I lo-o-o-o-ved the beatdown but to imply it was a foregone conclusion is revisionist.
[/quote]

I don't remember it quite like you, and I'll be open about some bias I have against football north of the Mason Dixon and east of the Mississippi.

First off, I didn't say it was a foregone conclusion.  Second of all, it's absolutely revisionist theory to say that everyone was picking VT.  VaTech was ranked 13th going into that game with two early loses and coming out of a weak conference.  Stanford (ranked 5th) was only favored by a little because the Pac10, as usual in recent years, was deemed soft.  (In AP, bring them two places closer at 12th and 6th, respectively.)

You are also forgetting the griping about the game being on the other side of the country and even some carping about the Rose Bowl.

There will be lots of discussion on a national level lamenting the thought that Stanford fans wouldn't buy enough tickets to warrant a more desirable slot against a better team in the Sugar Bowl or Fiesta Bowl, and griping throughout Cardinal Nation that an obscure clause in the BCS contract kept the team from its rightful place in the Rose Bowl.

http://www.gomightycard.com/orange-bowl/

I can't speak for everyone, but I specifically remember people thinking we would have been better Fiesta Bowl draws (Oklahoma rematch) and either Ohio State or Arkansas in the Sugar (all of these top 10 teams and all based on rankings bigger challenges than VaTech.)

Ohio State and OU and "bigger" opponents from bigger conferences than VaTech.  When they are ranked higher, they are simply better post season opponents.