The Case for Hawaii Cont'd  

The Big 10 is a "miserable" conference? By whatever stretch you want to label them, that conference is still ranked above the one Hawaii plays in.

And that OSU non-conference drum you like to hammer home did include Washington who beat (rather easily I might add) Boise State - your marquee win.

You also fail citing schedule strength while trotting out the "best three wins" of each team. Since when does that qualify as an accurate snapshot? Schedule strength is computed on all games played and Hawaii, according to TellShow and others, is dead last in SoS. I find it weird and bizarre that you harp so much on schedule strength of others when yours is the worst in college football.

It's commendable Hawaii is undefeated to this point, but that's about it.

PS: One quick thing - better also revise how many teams on OSU schedule are in the BCS Top 25

Fair points. First, I'd like to correct myself. Hawaii and Ohio State both have exactly ONE win over a BCS top 25 team. Yes Ohio State also had Illinois on the schedule. The same Illinois team that whooped them up and down their own field.

Now on to the other points. First of all, it is imperative that people understand that Hawaii is not "our" team here at the323. We are not from Hawaii nor are we Hawaii fans. Actually we live in Boston, so there is no bias here whatsoever.

Second, I never meant to imply that the Big 10 was worse than the WAC. That is simply absurd. BUT what everyone seems to forget is that Hawaii has one less loss than Ohio State. Yes the Big 10 schedule was better than the WAC, but in order to put Ohio State ahead of Hawaii you would have to make the argument that the Big 10 was sufficiently better to overcome a loss. I just don't see it. The Big 10 was down this year.....very down. Michigan, Wisconsin, Penn State, all traditional powers, all down this year. Are those teams better than Boise State, Nevada, and Fresno State? Yes. Are they far and away better, so much so to make up for Ohio State losing to Illinois at home? I contend no, and there is definitely an argument to be made there.

Third, and finally, by no means are we trying to hide the fact that Hawaii's schedule was the worst in college football. It was awful, we know this. And I think we've made it clear that in ANY other year they would be nowhere near the national title game. But this season there are no dominant teams that ALSO have a great schedule. Every team from the BCS conferences has at least one loss, and those that have only the single blemish (Kansas, WVU, and Ohio St notable) have a significantly weaker schedule that you'd expect from a BCS conference team. Bottom line, it's a perfect storm for Hawaii this year. Any other year and I'd agree that the team with the weakest schedule in the nation should be nowhere near the title game, but 2007 has been unlike any other year ever. Why not give Hawaii a shot when nobody else has been able to do what they're one win away from doing.....win every game they are supposed to!

I find this so disingenuous and full of hyperbole.

* Ohio State was 'whooped' to the beating of 7 points.

* You mention the number of teams on OSU schedule not to show how many they've beaten but in an attempt to illustrate SoS. Even still, they beat one team (they same as Hawaii) but their remaining games were orders of magnitude better than Hawaii's - thus the schedule strength disparity.

* Yes, the B10 is sufficiently better than the WAC. The numbers aren't all that close.

* Winning every game is great but this is precisely why SoS is important.