PDA

View Full Version : Rematch? Yes or No?



MWM
11-18-2006, 10:23 PM
Should Michigan and Ohio State play for the National Title? Not do you WANT to see it, but should it happen?

And all this is assuming Rutgers loses at some point.

wheels
11-18-2006, 10:27 PM
Yes, emphatically so.

cincinnati chili
11-18-2006, 10:54 PM
"Some point" might be tonight for Rutgers.

I think Michigan deserves a chance as much as the other 1-loss teams. They probably are the 2nd best team in the country.

Personally, I think they should stop calling it the Nat'l championship though. It's the championship of 3 or 4 conferences. I don't see anybody calling for Boise State to get an invitation. Plus, even if Rutgers wins out, many say they'll get passed over too. And they're in the Big East for cryin' out loud.

I'm glad I don't have a passion for college sports, because those of you who do must be very, very frustrated with the f'ed up BCS system.

RFS62
11-18-2006, 10:57 PM
Well, I've felt for a while now that Michigan and Ohio State truly are the best two teams on earth and I'd love to see a rematch for the title.

Today's game was incredible.

Patpacillosjock
11-18-2006, 11:59 PM
I vote no. Not because Michigan doesnt deserve it per se, but I feel it will be anticlimatic for OSU fans AND college football fans in general. Nobody outside of OSU/UM fans would watch a rematch and you better believe the BCS takes MONEY into account for the NC game.

I would actually prefer a ND matchup. Brady Quinn vs Troy Smith. both are seniors. both are/were up for the heisman. Last game for both quarterbacks before they go to the NFL. rematch from last year's fiesta bowl. Zmardja vs. Ginn. I just think it would be a more attractive game for everyone.

MWM
11-19-2006, 12:03 AM
The poll isn't about preference, but about whether it's equitable.

guttle11
11-19-2006, 12:30 AM
How can a team be legit National Champs when they didn't win their conference?

No, No, No. Michigan has a great team, but USC, Florida, and potentially Arkansas would have a better claim, IMO.

LoganBuck
11-19-2006, 12:39 AM
I vote no, just because I feel that the teams should be conference winners. Tressel and Carr stated as much early in the week.

SandyD
11-19-2006, 12:41 AM
That's my feeling. As long as there is a single title game and no playoffs, the teams should be chosen from among conference champions.

RedFanAlways1966
11-19-2006, 12:52 AM
The title game should match the two best teams in D-I football. Is it possible to have the two best teams in D-I football in the same conference? Yes, it is. Is it possible for one of these teams to win the conference title and the other team to not win the conference title? Yes, it is.

It should be the top two teams... period.

Patpacillosjock
11-19-2006, 12:57 AM
The poll isn't about preference, but about whether it's equitable.


ok fine then. no it shouldnt happen and if anybody thinks it SHOULD, then they are being biased either for Michigan or the big ten.

with the poll system in college football, there will never be "two best teams in the country."

It SHOULD be Arkansas/Florida or Notre Dame or USC

period.

RedFanAlways1966
11-19-2006, 01:00 AM
ok fine then. no it shouldnt happen and if anybody thinks it SHOULD, then they are being biased either for Michigan or the big ten.

with the poll system in college football, there will never be "two best teams in the country."

It SHOULD be Arkansas/Florida or Notre Dame or USC

period.

I never said how I voted. So you SHOULD NOT make assumptions... period.

MWM
11-19-2006, 01:07 AM
if anybody thinks it SHOULD, then they are being biased either for Michigan or the big ten.


Gawd, I hate these kinds of statements. Plenty of people, and I know of a couple on this thread, think it's the right thing that have no bias at towards the Big Ten.

I'm a Buckeye fan, and the last team I'd want to see in the final is Michigan.

Different people have different criteria. Some think conference champs should play only. I think that's a legitimate point of view. Others think it should be the best two teams regardless of conference. I think that's a legit point of view. Under the current system, there is rrom for differing opinions.

I think the only scenario at this point that would allow it to happen would be for Notre Dame to beat USC and Arkansas beat Florida (assuming they both win their remaining games before this one which isn't a given especially for AK who has to play LSU). I think the voters would have a much easier time ranking Michigan ahead of Arkansas as opposed to Florida. Not saying it's fair, but brand name will come into play and Florida's is much better.

But if the choice is between Notre Dame and Michigan, I'd have a hard time believing the voters in both polls would put the Irish ahead of the Wolverines with both having onle loss and with the magnitude of Michigan's win and the fact that it was in South Bend. Of course, it's happened before with Notre Dame being absolutely screwed in 1993, so you never know.

SandyD
11-19-2006, 01:27 AM
Sure, the best two teams in the country can be in the same conference. And the best team may not actually win their conference. If they don't, however, they shouldn't play for the national title. Not in a single title game.

How many playoff systems yield the "two best teams" in the respective sports, year after year? Think the Cards and the Tigers were the best teams in baseball last year?

As for college football, there is really no objective way to determine the two best teams in the country. The level of competition varies too much year to year, and conference to conference. Preseason polls play too big a role.

Edit: For the record ... I'm not suggesting those who favor a rematch claiming OSU and UM are the two best teams in the country are showing Big Ten bias. It's just my opionion that conference championship should weigh heavily when comparing teams with the same, or even a similar record.

MWM
11-19-2006, 01:40 AM
Right after the game, Doug Flutie said he didn't think there should be a rematch. He's now saying he thinks there should be a rematch. IMO, Michigan being the opponent in the title game would be OSU's worst nightmare. I definitely DO NOT want that to happen.

It will be interesting to see how the voters vote. For example, many of them will NOT want to see a rematch. The computers are gong to like Michigan as they are the only loss to ND and Wisconsin and they're only loss is to the #1 team. If they're #3 to any team other than USC, that might be enough to propel them to #2 in the BCS.

There's no way Michigan is worse than #4. The winner of USC/ND could be ahead of them, and the winner of ARK/FLA could be ahead of them. But that's it. Would some voters put them at #5 or below just to prevent a leapfrog from happening? If USC wins out, it will be all moot. But I really think Notre Dame will beat them based on what I've seen of USC (that prediction probably spells doom of the Irish). That puts the winner of FLA/Ark at #2. Both are really good teams, but as a Bucks fan, I wouldn't mind seeing either one of them in the title game over the other teams in the mix.

The following scenario is NOT all that unlikely:

Arkansas loses to LSU
Arkansas beats Florida (this one isn't quite as likely, but not unreasonable either)
Notre Dame beats USC

That would leave Notre Dame and Michigan. If that happens I've got to believe Michigan will get the nod. That really means Notre Dame doesn't have much chance at all. If Notre Dame win, I think the rematch will happen. That means Michigan fans have to root for Notre Dame. :lol:

If I had to guess right now, I'd say it will be Florida. Of all the teams left, I believe they're the ones least likely to lose. This would probably be fine with most Buckeye fans (sorry, Krono. Nothing personal, but I don't think they're going to scare anyone). The only other team that would be a more desirable opponent would be Arkansas, which I don't see winning out. I wouldn't want to see Michigan, USC, or even Notre Dame.

BTW, Mark May is either an idiot or drunk (or both). He just said he didn't think Michigan would be able to beat Arkansas. Really, he just said that!

MWM
11-19-2006, 01:53 AM
Edit: For the record ... I'm not suggesting those who favor a rematch claiming OSU and UM are the two best teams in the country are showing Big Ten bias. It's just my opionion that conference championship should weigh heavily when comparing teams with the same, or even a similar record.

I think that's a fair opinion.

jmcclain19
11-19-2006, 02:06 AM
No. Absolutely not.

The Big Ten as a whole is god awful this year. The last thing the sport needs to do is reward that by putting two teams from the conference in the championship game.

Penn State & Purdue - both tied for fourth in the conference, would be hard pressed to not to finish dead last in the SEC.

Plus if I had to put up with several weeks more of a Michigan/Ohio State national media lovefest I'll gouge out my ears with a pen knife.

MWM
11-19-2006, 02:08 AM
None of the conferences are all that great this year. And why penalize a team because the rest of the teams in the conference aren't very good? I think Michigan proved today they're legit and a great team irrepsective of how good the conference is.

WMR
11-19-2006, 02:13 AM
I want to see it again.

Cedric
11-19-2006, 02:30 AM
Being selfish I want no part of Michigan again. It's just not realistic to expect to beat that great of a team twice and in back to back games.

I'm not sure WHO deserves the shot at TOSU, I just hope it's USC or Florida.

MWM
11-19-2006, 02:34 AM
Being selfish I want no part of Michigan again. It's just not realistic to expect to beat that great of a team twice and in back to back games.

I'm not sure WHO deserves the shot at TOSU, I just hope it's USC or Florida.

My thoughts exactly. No disrespect intended for those two teams, but OSU would have a much tougher time with Michigan again that any of USC, Florida, or Arkansas. I'll be pulling for the Trojans next weekend.

jmcclain19
11-19-2006, 03:32 AM
None of the conferences are all that great this year. And why penalize a team because the rest of the teams in the conference aren't very good? I think Michigan proved today they're legit and a great team irrepsective of how good the conference is.

Are you arguing you that for Michigan? Or for Louisville, West Virginia & Rutgers?

Because that is literally the exact same argument that Big East fans have been using all season to pump up their teams.

And if that's the case, step forward to the BCS Championship game unbeaten Boise State.

I'm picking on you about that MWM - but we'll hear it all week. It simply blows my mind to hear some network blowhard spouting about why an undefeated Rutgers team didn't deserve a shot because of their competition.

I know it would considered blasphamy around most of college football due to the shelf OSU & Michigan are on - but I don't think the Big East and the Big Ten are really any different this year. And I think its going to be that way going forward in the coming years as well. Both have three top shelf teams, and lots of crappy others. If experts and fans are going to say that Rutgers can't be in the championship game because of the teams they played - why not even broach the fact of whether an undefeated Michigan or Ohio State deserves to be in it either? The Big Ten competition league wise is just as awful as the Big East these days - it's just been assumed that Big Ten undefeated=Championship game for weeks now. The idea seems to be beyond the discussion scope these days. Which just astounds me.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

People were SHOCKED last year when the SEC champ Georgia got throttled by West Virginia in the Sugar Bowl. Georgia ended up making it interesting in the end, but a "minnow" Big East champ domianted the champion of College Football's pillar division for most of the game - that was a watershed moment in my opinion proving that talent levels aren't all that different anymore. It makes for great college football, but it also means the playing field is much more level.

Rutgers proved out today they aren't quite up to that top level - which will happen, so no one will get to see the inherent bias towards major programs rear its ugly head in poll voting - at least in regards to the Big East.

But Michigan had their chance today. And they blew it. Next please.

BoydsOfSummer
11-19-2006, 03:40 AM
No. I don't know if we could beat them again.:D Heller of a game though.

dougdirt
11-19-2006, 03:41 AM
Is Michigan the 2nd best team in the country? I dont know. They might be. OSU had a -3 turnover ratio and still won the game. The way I see it, UM had their chance to beat OSU and could not do it. Regardless of if I think they are the 2nd best team in the country, I think someone else should get the shot be it Florida/Arkansas/ND/USC.

harangatang
11-19-2006, 03:55 AM
Absolutely not. The rules are the rules whether you like them or not. Letting a rematch occur between Michigan and Ohio State would not be fair to the eventual #2 team in the country who will play Ohio State. This reminds me of the Padres when they finished in 2005 with an 82-80 record. There were some people on ESPN (maybe more elsewhere) saying that since there were better teams than the Padres not going to the playoffs that the best team in the NL should replace the Pads (imagine if that would've happened in 2006, bye bye Redbirds). If Michigan wanted to play in the national championship game they would've shown it Saturday on the field by winning the game.

jmcclain19
11-19-2006, 04:14 AM
And speaking of the National Championship game - I heard something from Steve Spurrier the other day that gave me pause, and I'm going to pass it along here.

He was talking about the BCS - and someone mentioned how it was obviously better than the old system, and he corrected them, and said his Championship in 1996 was due to the old system and would not be possible today. And thus is why he isn't the biggest of fans of the BCS system.

In 96, his Gators - Just like Michigan today - lost the last game of the season to Florida State when both were undefeated. The other undefeated team, No. 2 Arizona State, had to play in the Rose Bowl, so Florida - who was dropped to #3 in the ranking - had to play No. 1 Florida State had a rematch for their bowl game. Ohio State upset ASU, and Florida ended up winning, and thus, the Gators became the National Champs.

Maybe that happens this season? Michigan thumps someone in the Rose Bowl, and USC upsets Ohio State, and the AP voters stick it to the BCS and give their championship to Michigan.

Regardless, the fact that we all have to sit here and split hairs over which computer and coach will vote the 2nd best team in the nation is beyond stupid. It should be settled on the field.

Caveat Emperor
11-19-2006, 04:45 AM
No rematch.

Rematching the two teams would completely destroy the meaning of this game. What if they rematch and Michigan wins? Then you have 2 1-loss teams, with each team's loss coming to one another in consecutive games played. Do you schedule the rubber match for 2 weeks later and then finally determine which of the two teams is better.

Michigan lost. Ohio State gave them gift-wrapped turnovers and they couldn't make enough plays to win the game. They don't deserve to be in the national championship game -- they've had their chance to knock off #1, and they failed. They failed to make it to #1 and they failed to win their conference. They shouldn't get another shot at the big game. It wouldn't be fair to teams like USC and Florida (assuming they win out) who win their conferences and only have 1 loss on their records.

Rematches make babies cry.

GAC
11-19-2006, 05:55 AM
Right after the game, Doug Flutie said he didn't think there should be a rematch. He's now saying he thinks there should be a rematch.

That's because his last name says it all.... he's a flutie! IMO, the guy has no business being an game analyst. He's like "Whatever you two say is OK with me". :lol:

You like this Mike. He reminds me of Mr. Kruger....

http://gfx.filmweb.pl/p/4564/po.111194.jpg



The following scenario is NOT all that unlikely:

Arkansas loses to LSU
Arkansas beats Florida (this one isn't quite as likely, but not unreasonable either)
Notre Dame beats USC

That would leave Notre Dame and Michigan. If that happens I've got to believe Michigan will get the nod. That really means Notre Dame doesn't have much chance at all. If Notre Dame win, I think the rematch will happen. That means Michigan fans have to root for Notre Dame.

I don't think ND deserves to be in the game period OVER Michigan.

And I kind of hate to see a rematch, and I agree with what cornerback Antonio Smith said - "I think it takes away from the rivalry here."

But the above sentiment is simply an OSU fan speaking.

If you really want the two best teams in the nation in this game, then it should be Michigan IMO. But something else also tells me "Hey! Michigan had their chance."

I'm perplexed. :lol:


If I had to guess right now, I'd say it will be Florida. Of all the teams left, I believe they're the ones least likely to lose.

That has been my position all along. If they beat the Razorbacks in the SEC title game, they'll get in IMO, and most likely deserve to be there.

Final note.... if there is a rematch. I think OSU will beat them by a greater margin. I loved listened to the game analysis yesterday during the second half where they were giving so much credit to the Michigan defensive coordinator for making adjustments..

OSU came out and played sloppy and somewhat lackluster IMO. They also weren't using the spread offense as much, and I thought that was a mistake. When Michigan put those quick 10 pts on the board I thought to myself "C'mon Bucks. Don't get down on yourselves. You're letting these guys back into the game!"

But again.... that's a biased OSU fan speaking. ;)

GAC
11-19-2006, 05:56 AM
No rematch.

Rematching the two teams would completely destroy the meaning of this game. What if they rematch and Michigan wins? Then you have 2 1-loss teams, with each team's loss coming to one another in consecutive games played. Do you schedule the rubber match for 2 weeks later and then finally determine which of the two teams is better.

Michigan lost. Ohio State gave them gift-wrapped turnovers and they couldn't make enough plays to win the game. They don't deserve to be in the national championship game -- they've had their chance to knock off #1, and they failed.

That is pretty much how I see it too. They had their chance.

And I bet that is how the BCS will see it too; but we'll see.

Cedric
11-19-2006, 07:06 AM
No rematch.

Rematching the two teams would completely destroy the meaning of this game. What if they rematch and Michigan wins? Then you have 2 1-loss teams, with each team's loss coming to one another in consecutive games played. Do you schedule the rubber match for 2 weeks later and then finally determine which of the two teams is better.

Michigan lost. Ohio State gave them gift-wrapped turnovers and they couldn't make enough plays to win the game. They don't deserve to be in the national championship game -- they've had their chance to knock off #1, and they failed. They failed to make it to #1 and they failed to win their conference. They shouldn't get another shot at the big game. It wouldn't be fair to teams like USC and Florida (assuming they win out) who win their conferences and only have 1 loss on their records.

Rematches make babies cry.

Why should Michigan be punished for losing to the best team in the nation? On the road? Just because it was their mythical shot at the title? Didn't USC lose that shot when they stunk it up against friggin Oregon State?

I don't see why Michigan should be punished for losing their shot just because it's their last game. The rationale for pollsters should be to rank the teams according to what they actually think they should be.

I don't want a rematch, but I can't really argue against it if it happens.

GAC
11-19-2006, 07:52 AM
So.... the #2 team in the nation (that's if Michigan stays #2) should get two shots?

If at first you don't succeed, try, try, again. :lol:

And if they happen to beat OSU by a similar score, they are then crowned NC's?

Or should they be co-champs? I mean after all, you're then looking at the two best teams in the nation who SPLIT their two meetings in tight contests. ;)

The above scenario is why, IMO, the BCS will avoid it like the plague. No way they allow it to happen.

Michigan had their shot at the #1 team in the nation and lost.

And I understand the argument that they are the best 1 loss team of the bunch.

But they aren't going to get another shot IMHO.

It'll be the winner of the USC-ND game (because I think Florida is gonna get beat by the Razorbacks).

ND's loss, even though it was to Michigan was an early season loss. And therefore the argument can be put forward that it is not the same ND team as earlier in the season.

dman
11-19-2006, 07:58 AM
Too many people in high places are already biased against the Big Ten anyway. It just eats at these same people that OSU was the #1 team. I look for USC to play OSU in the NC game.
IMHO, I think USC should pull away from any conference and become independent. Talk about a team that never plays anybody or plays an easy schedule.

GAC
11-19-2006, 08:40 AM
Ok... I'm on my 3rd cup of Maxwell House this morning, and here is what I think....

Based on the system and historically what happens (even prior to the BCS) - the general consensus is that it's more harmful to loss late then lose early.

Michigan is gonna drop to #7 in the polls. Why?

Other then Rutgers and Michigan, every other team 1 thru 7 won. It doesn't matter WHO some of these teams played...

Florida vs Western Carolina
ND vs Army

They won. Period. And Michigan lost.

People can argue strength of schedule and such, but each computer ranking accounts for schedule strength in its formula. It's just not the sole determining factor.

Winning is.

Michigan, IMO, is now sitting on the outside looking in, and has one heck of a hurdle/scenario to overcome.

They will need Florida, USC, Arkansas, and Notre Dame to ALL lose. And two of those 4 teams will be eliminated since they have games coming up versus each other.

But no way that Michigan vaults over the two winners who themselves will be arguing over who won the right to play OSU in January.

Michigan is now sitting on the outside because of the human voting factor of the BCS.

RedsBaron
11-19-2006, 09:02 AM
In a few weeks there probably will be a number of teams with only loss, including the winner of the USC-Notre Dame game, and the SEC champion (Arkansas or Florida), and one or more teams from the Big East (WVU, Louisville). Michigan had its chance. Give somebody else a chance against OSU.

NJReds
11-19-2006, 09:35 AM
If it ends up that these are the two best teams in the country, then they should have a rematch. I have no problem with that. (I'm not a Mich or OSU fan). On a personal note, yesterday's game was fantastic and I'd look forward to watching them battle it out again.

RFS62
11-19-2006, 09:41 AM
That game last night reminded me of Ali - Frazier. The two top heavyweights in the world slugging it out toe to toe.

How often does the game live up to the hype? Hardly ever.

I'd like to see another fight.

max venable
11-19-2006, 10:04 AM
I voted "no." Mainly for the reasons that have already been mentioned here: If you want to play in the NC game...win your conference.

But, as a Buckeye fan, I would love to beat Michigan twice in one season. That would be Sah-weet!

SandyD
11-19-2006, 10:14 AM
You know, it was a great game yesterday. I'd love to see a rematch. Just not in the title game.

Puffy
11-19-2006, 10:28 AM
Ok... I'm on my 3rd cup of Maxwell House this morning, and here is what I think....

Based on the system and historically what happens (even prior to the BCS) - the general consensus is that it's more harmful to loss late then lose early.

Michigan is gonna drop to #7 in the polls. Why?

Other then Rutgers and Michigan, every other team 1 thru 7 won. It doesn't matter WHO some of these teams played...

Florida vs Western Carolina
ND vs Army

They won. Period. And Michigan lost.

People can argue strength of schedule and such, but each computer ranking accounts for schedule strength in its formula. It's just not the sole determining factor.

Winning is.

Michigan, IMO, is now sitting on the outside looking in, and has one heck of a hurdle/scenario to overcome.

They will need Florida, USC, Arkansas, and Notre Dame to ALL lose. And two of those 4 teams will be eliminated since they have games coming up versus each other.

But no way that Michigan vaults over the two winners who themselves will be arguing over who won the right to play OSU in January.

Michigan is now sitting on the outside because of the human voting factor of the BCS.

Michigan is not dropping to 7. The farthest the fall is to 5. But i don't think they fall even that far. They will either be 3, 4 or 5.

Matt700wlw
11-19-2006, 10:31 AM
The poll isn't about preference, but about whether it's equitable.

I voted yes....but I doubt the BCS would let it happen.

Notre Dame (if they beat USC) would be in the running....BUT Michigan clobbered them....

Rutgers is out....obviously.....GO CATS!! :D

NJReds
11-19-2006, 10:45 AM
I voted yes....but I doubt the BCS would let it happen.

Notre Dame (if they beat USC) would be in the running....BUT Michigan clobbered them....



I'm a Notre Dame fan, but they'd probably give up 100 points to Ohio State. I don't think Florida would challenge OSU, either. USC could probably hang w/OSU for a while. And they'll most likely get the shot if they beat ND.

Arkansas is a darkhorse. If they beat LSU and Florida, they probably deserve the shot.

RFS62
11-19-2006, 10:55 AM
I keep hearing about how a rematch would fly in the face of tradition.

One of the strongest traditions I'm aware of in the college bowl universe is how seldom you actually see the top two teams meet in the championship game.

You've got the two best teams. Let them play again.

Matt700wlw
11-19-2006, 10:58 AM
I'm a Notre Dame fan, but they'd probably give up 100 points to Ohio State. I don't think Florida would challenge OSU, either. USC could probably hang w/OSU for a while. And they'll most likely get the shot if they beat ND.

Arkansas is a darkhorse. If they beat LSU and Florida, they probably deserve the shot.


Forgot about Arkansas....nobody talks about them.....

A good "fly under the radar" team

NJReds
11-19-2006, 11:04 AM
Forgot about Arkansas....nobody talks about them.....

A good "fly under the radar" team


Their problem is that they opened the season by getting hammered at home by USC: 50-14.

But they've beaten Tennessee and Auburn, they play LSU next week and Florida in the SEC Championship game.

Gainesville Red
11-19-2006, 11:19 AM
I voted no. You understand I may be a bit biased. ;)

cincinnati chili
11-19-2006, 11:59 AM
Who should Boise State play? Should they get a BCS bid?

I'm sure most people will say their schedule is too weak, but football limits the number of out-of-conference games one can play. And the championship is supposed to be of the 128 (or so) teams in I-A.

guttle11
11-19-2006, 12:20 PM
I keep hearing about how a rematch would fly in the face of tradition.

One of the strongest traditions I'm aware of in the college bowl universe is how seldom you actually see the top two teams meet in the championship game.

You've got the two best teams. Let them play again.

But why would Michigan deserve another shot at Ohio State? They had their chance, and they lost.

If Michigan gets #2 in the BCS, why wouldn't they just give the trophy to Ohio State? It would be Michigan vs Ohio State. That game already got played.

As a Buckeye fan, I want USC. OSU and USC have been the top 2 programs this decade. Let's get it on!

GAC
11-19-2006, 12:24 PM
Michigan is not dropping to 7. The farthest the fall is to 5. But i don't think they fall even that far. They will either be 3, 4 or 5.

First off, I made a mistake. I meant 6th position, not 7th. My bad.

And yes, I can see them dropping to sixth with even ND vaulting over them. But at least fifth. But we'll see.

Matt700wlw
11-19-2006, 12:34 PM
I don't see ND jumping over Michigan unless they beat USC...

Of course, why we are trying to figure out the BCS is beyond me :D

MWM
11-19-2006, 12:38 PM
Are you arguing you that for Michigan? Or for Louisville, West Virginia & Rutgers?

Because that is literally the exact same argument that Big East fans have been using all season to pump up their teams.

And if that's the case, step forward to the BCS Championship game unbeaten Boise State.

I'm picking on you about that MWM - but we'll hear it all week. It simply blows my mind to hear some network blowhard spouting about why an undefeated Rutgers team didn't deserve a shot because of their competition.

I know it would considered blasphamy around most of college football due to the shelf OSU & Michigan are on - but I don't think the Big East and the Big Ten are really any different this year. And I think its going to be that way going forward in the coming years as well. Both have three top shelf teams, and lots of crappy others. If experts and fans are going to say that Rutgers can't be in the championship game because of the teams they played - why not even broach the fact of whether an undefeated Michigan or Ohio State deserves to be in it either? The Big Ten competition league wise is just as awful as the Big East these days - it's just been assumed that Big Ten undefeated=Championship game for weeks now. The idea seems to be beyond the discussion scope these days. Which just astounds me.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

People were SHOCKED last year when the SEC champ Georgia got throttled by West Virginia in the Sugar Bowl. Georgia ended up making it interesting in the end, but a "minnow" Big East champ domianted the champion of College Football's pillar division for most of the game - that was a watershed moment in my opinion proving that talent levels aren't all that different anymore. It makes for great college football, but it also means the playing field is much more level.

Rutgers proved out today they aren't quite up to that top level - which will happen, so no one will get to see the inherent bias towards major programs rear its ugly head in poll voting - at least in regards to the Big East.

But Michigan had their chance today. And they blew it. Next please.

Hey, I argued all along that if Rutgers went undefeated they should absolutely be playing for the national championship. The rest of your argument is more about the strength of conferences than the teams. Some folks think that's incredibly important to the argument, some don't. I can honestly see both sides of it. I'm one who looks more at the individual teams at this point as opposed to conferences. As long as it's as subjective as it is now, there's only opinion. There's no concrete right answer.

As for the ideas many seem to be promoting of "they had their chance", well I just don't see why that matters. If one team has th same resume as another (i.e. one loss), then it should all be a matter of what team people *think* is the strongest. At least that's how I see it. I've heard folks say another team should get a chance. We're talking about the National Championship here. IMO, it's inherently unfair to put a regular season game in the decision making for for the second team under the guise of "that was their shot." That was a regular season game and the idea that this was their chance makes it more of a post-season game, and I don't believe that's fair considering the other teams in the mix never had to play a game that was "their chance."

As long as we have polls deciding everything, it becomes a matter of opinion of who is the best team. Hell, there's no way to know who is the best team between Michigan, Fla/Ark, USC/ND winner, WVU/Lou. We can only guess. But the polls should be about who's the best team regardless of any other factors.

oneupper
11-19-2006, 12:52 PM
You've got the two best teams. Let them play again.

Sez who? That's an issue.

Michigan and OSU played a very interesting game yesterday....
However, last I looked, DEFENSE was still a part of the game of football.
Didn't see much of that from either team.

Ohio State is still "king of the hill". Michigan failed to topple them. NEXT!

bucksfan
11-19-2006, 12:52 PM
If they are the 2 best teams (and I believe they are) then certainly they should play for the championship if that is truly what the game is supposed to be. If you want to go back to the old bowl system and just have a pretty matchup against 2 good teams that you'd like to see play, then that is where the the statements of "not wanting to see a rematch" come into play. But with this game designated by the BCS as a championship game, I think Michigan has every bit as much of a claim on playing the Buckeyes as anyone else, and arguably the best claim. There should not be any consideratiosn at all toward whether the game would be a rematch or not. And if tsun was generally regarded as the #2 team in the nation priror to Saturday, how in the world is anything different today?

OnBaseMachine
11-19-2006, 12:58 PM
Too many people in high places are already biased against the Big Ten anyway. It just eats at these same people that OSU was the #1 team. I look for USC to play OSU in the NC game.
IMHO, I think USC should pull away from any conference and become independent. Talk about a team that never plays anybody or plays an easy schedule.

Ummm...USC has the #3 strenth of schedule in the country and it will likely rise after the ND game. 80% of the Pac-10 is bowl eligible. The Pac-10 is a very good conference.

NJReds
11-19-2006, 01:29 PM
Ummm...USC has the #3 strenth of schedule in the country and it will likely rise after the ND game. 80% of the Pac-10 is bowl eligible. The Pac-10 is a very good conference.

And they played Arkansas, Nebraska and ND as their out of conference schedule.

OnBaseMachine
11-19-2006, 01:44 PM
And they played Arkansas, Nebraska and ND as their out of conference schedule.

80% of the Pac-10 is bowl eligible. How many other conferences can say that?

paintmered
11-19-2006, 01:49 PM
Here's my top 5 after yesterday's games.

1. OSU
2. USC
3. Michigan
4. Arkansas
5. Florida

If ND beats USC, then Michigan is back in the title game IMO. If USC wins out, then they are in the game.

RFS62
11-19-2006, 01:52 PM
Here's my top 5 after yesterday's games.

1. OSU
2. USC
3. Michigan
4. Arkansas
5. Florida

If ND beats USC, then Michigan is back in the title game IMO. If USC wins out, then they are in the game.


As much as I'd like to see them play again, it's pretty hard to argue with that.

Virginia Beach Reds
11-19-2006, 01:54 PM
Any other year I wouldn't advocate a rematch. However, this year, college football in total is down. I've watched many games and I'm not impressed. I think we all watched the two best teams in the nation last night and the way that the game was played, on a crappy field, in the Horsehshoe all adds to Michigan deserves another shot on a neutral field. Now, if OSU would have won by 2 touchdowns, I would have said no. But based on that game, and the depth of talent in college this year, it spells a rematch. MWM gave the scenarios...If USC beats ND and UCLA, they probably deserve shot #1. Next, if Florida remains unbeaten they probably deserve shot #2. If Florida loses and USC gets beat by ND, Michigan deserves shot #3. I don't think any of the teams play with either Michigan or OSU. I believe the best game would be a rematch. USC, ND, Florida or Arkansas wouldn't stay within 17 pts of the Buckeyes. OSU would beat ND by 28 points, IMO.

pedro
11-19-2006, 02:12 PM
Here's my top 5 after yesterday's games.

1. OSU
2. USC
3. Michigan
4. Arkansas
5. Florida

If ND beats USC, then Michigan is back in the title game IMO. If USC wins out, then they are in the game.


USC lost to Oregon St.

They have no business in the championship game IMO.

cincy09
11-19-2006, 02:48 PM
no conference title
no shot at National title

Spring~Fields
11-19-2006, 03:31 PM
USA Today Poll

1. Ohio State (63)

2. USC

3. Michigan

4. Florida

5. Arkansas

6. Notre Dame

7. West Virginia

8. LSU

9. Wisconsin

10. Texas

AP Poll

1. Ohio State (65)

2. Michigan

3. USC

4. Florida

5. Arkansas

6. Notre Dame

7. West Virginia

8. Louisville

9. LSU

10. Wisconsin

max venable
11-19-2006, 03:56 PM
U-M stayed at #2 in the AP poll. Interesting.

dougdirt
11-19-2006, 04:01 PM
U-M stayed at #2 in the AP poll. Interesting.

It is, but it isnt. While OSU lost the turnover battle 3-0 and let Michigan stay in the game, they played within 3 of the best team in the country. I think if USC beat ND, they will jump ahead of Michigan in the AP. If ND wins, Michigan stays at #2.

paintmered
11-19-2006, 04:02 PM
U-M stayed at #2 in the AP poll. Interesting.

But the AP poll has no effect on the BCS standings since being removed from the formula a few years ago. So while it makes for interesting discussion, that's the extent of its significance.

max venable
11-19-2006, 04:07 PM
Anybody hear Mike Hart in the press conference immediately following the game? First words out of his mouth: "If we played them again, it would be a completely different outcome...I guarantee it."

Whatever. The game was barely over, they just got beat, but somehow he thinks U-M would thump the Bucks if they had it to do over. C'mon.

How different would the outcome be, Mike? Ohio State by 17? That's more like it. What about that game made you think your team is actually better, even though you lost? And if you could thump the Bucks in a rematch, why didn't you just go ahead and do it when you had the chance.

Great player. Dumb quote.

pedro
11-19-2006, 04:18 PM
Anybody hear Mike Hart in the press conference immediately following the game? First words out of his mouth: "If we played them again, it would be a completely different outcome...I guarantee it."

Whatever. The game was barely over, they just got beat, but somehow he thinks U-M would thump the Bucks if they had it to do over. C'mon.

How different would the outcome be, Mike? Ohio State by 17? That's more like it. What about that game made you think your team is actually better, even though you lost? And if you could thump the Bucks in a rematch, why didn't you just go ahead and do it when you had the chance.

Great player. Dumb quote.

If Michigan didn't give up those two long running TD's in the 1st half, they very well might have beat the Buckeye's by 17.

Ohio State played a really good game and had a nice gameplan and I commend them for it, but I wouldn't go thumping my chest about how the outplayed Michigan. It was a toss up and they came out ahead. I'm not so sure they'd win in a rematch.

Spring~Fields
11-19-2006, 04:23 PM
Anybody hear Mike Hart in the press conference immediately following the game? First words out of his mouth: "If we played them again, it would be a completely different outcome...I guarantee it."

Great player. Dumb quote.

Yes I read his sour grapes and selective remarks while omitting other facts. While he remarked about Ohio State's defense, he completely left out that his own defense was nothing to write home about. Plus he failed to mention that Ohio State shot themselves in the foot without any help from his team several times through turnovers and dumb penalties that led to scores for Michigan or the score would have been worse.

Surprised though that no one has mentioned how bad that playing surface was during an athletic competition that relies heavily on footing to perform especially with the two teams speed.

Yes lets have a rematch on a good surface, let's see what a Lloyd team can do against a Tressel team. Then if Michigan wins, we can have Co-national champs. In about 50 days from now, I wonder how two teams with such a long layoff can perform.

Chip R
11-19-2006, 05:25 PM
USC lost to Oregon St.

They have no business in the championship game IMO.

Excellent point. By that logic it should be Boise St vs OSU. Michigan doesn't deserve a rematch cause they lost yesterday. ND doesn't deserve to be in there cause they lost to Michigan. Florida doesn't deserve it cause they lost. Texas doesn't deserve it cause they lost twice. WVU doesn't deserve it cause they lost to LOU who lost to Rutgers who lost to UC who lost to tOSU.

pedro
11-19-2006, 05:30 PM
Excellent point. By that logic it should be Boise St vs OSU. Michigan doesn't deserve a rematch cause they lost yesterday. ND doesn't deserve to be in there cause they lost to Michigan. Florida doesn't deserve it cause they lost. Texas doesn't deserve it cause they lost twice. WVU doesn't deserve it cause they lost to LOU who lost to Rutgers who lost to UC who lost to tOSU.

Exactly. :)

Puffy
11-19-2006, 05:36 PM
First off, I made a mistake. I meant 6th position, not 7th. My bad.

And yes, I can see them dropping to sixth with even ND vaulting over them. But at least fifth. But we'll see.

2 in the AP, 3 in the USA poll and 2 in the BCS.

Not to say I told you so......

max venable
11-19-2006, 05:37 PM
If Michigan didn't give up those two long running TD's in the 1st half, they very well might have beat the Buckeye's by 17.

Ohio State played a really good game and had a nice gameplan and I commend them for it, but I wouldn't go thumping my chest about how the outplayed Michigan. It was a toss up and they came out ahead. I'm not so sure they'd win in a rematch.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

If Ohio State had scored less, yes, Michigan could have won. If? But! Huh? But they didn't. And I don't recall thumping my chest...more like Mike Hart was thumping his even though he lost.

Spring~Fields
11-19-2006, 05:59 PM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

If Ohio State had scored less, yes, Michigan could have won. If? But! Huh? But they didn't. And I don't recall thumping my chest...more like Mike Hart was thumping his even though he lost.

I just hate to agree with you. ;) No, :laugh:

"Stat of the game... 503. The Ohio State offense rolled up 503 total yards on Michigan -- a unit that was allowing just 231 yards entering the game."
source: don't recall.

503 total yards even with the mistakes.

OnBaseMachine
11-19-2006, 06:14 PM
Here's my top 5 after yesterday's games.

1. OSU
2. USC
3. Michigan
4. Arkansas
5. Florida

If ND beats USC, then Michigan is back in the title game IMO. If USC wins out, then they are in the game.

I agree with that.

max venable
11-19-2006, 06:23 PM
In all honestly...I truly believe U-M is the second-best team in the country...and I also believe they do not deserve a shot at the NC...they had their shot...yesterday...and they came up short. Win your conference...win your last game...and then we'll talk. Unfair? Maybe...but it happens all the time in sports. How many times have we seen the two best teams in the NFL in the same conference...or even the same division...one team loses...the other team goes on to play in the Superbowl. Somebody already mentioned the Cards this year...they were far from the being the best team in baseball, but they won when they had to. They advance, the others don't. That's just how it is.

WMR
11-19-2006, 06:28 PM
http://Michigan.Wolverines.justgotowned.com

IN CASE you missed it in the Bengals thread...

feel free to make your own to annoy/pwn your friends. lol

Chip R
11-19-2006, 06:39 PM
You know, it would almost be apt if OSU faced USC in the championship game. If they won, they would have a clean sweep of 2 of the top programs over the past several years and Notre Dame.

MWM
11-19-2006, 07:56 PM
If Michigan didn't give up those two long running TD's in the 1st half, they very well might have beat the Buckeye's by 17.

Ohio State played a really good game and had a nice gameplan and I commend them for it, but I wouldn't go thumping my chest about how the outplayed Michigan. It was a toss up and they came out ahead. I'm not so sure they'd win in a rematch.

While I agree that Michigan is capable of beating Ohio State and the outcome of a rematch could be different, I'm not sure I agree with the logic behind "if they didn't give up those two long running TDs." You're assuming those drives would have resulted in no points. And based on the rest of the first half, they most likely would have scored anyway, maybe just not as quickly. I thought OSU outplayed Michigan handily in the first half. Ohio State basically outplayed themselves the second half with two turnovers attributable to the center and one to Smith. Michigan really didn't do anything to force them. Overall, I think Ohio State outplayed them, but not by a large margin. They did outgain them by 100 yards. But they gave them two scores without having to drive.

I think if we saw a rematch on a neutral field, it would be similar in that it would be neck and neck. I think either Michigan or Ohio State would be any of the other contenders soundly.

dman
11-19-2006, 10:22 PM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

If Ohio State had scored less, yes, Michigan could have won. If? But! Huh? But they didn't. And I don't recall thumping my chest...more like Mike Hart was thumping his even though he lost.

Max, he's also forgetting that if not for 2 bad snaps by the center, that game would never have been as close as the 3 point difference suggests. That interception really can't even be attributed to Smith, seeing that it was tipped into UM's hands.

I think the old saying "If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas" definitely applies here.

5DOLLAR-BLEACHERBUM
11-19-2006, 10:37 PM
If Michigan didn't give up those two long running TD's in the 1st half, they very well might have beat the Buckeye's by 17.

Ohio State played a really good game and had a nice gameplan and I commend them for it, but I wouldn't go thumping my chest about how the outplayed Michigan. It was a toss up and they came out ahead. I'm not so sure they'd win in a rematch.

Those two long runs are plays in the game, they are no different than any of the other plays that resulted in touchdowns, or turovers or anything else. Michigan fought hard to stay in the game ill give them that, but there is nobody that can convince me that OSU wasn't the best team out there. They were a COUPLE of plays away from blowing out Michigan is more like it, not a couple plays from losing it. If Ohio State didn't let Michigan score at all, and they scored 100 touchdowns then they might have beat Michigan by 700.

max venable
11-19-2006, 10:50 PM
You know what, though, guys? It just makes sense that...

...if Troy Smith hadn't thrown 4 TD passes...

...if Ted Ginn hadn't been wide open so much...

...if the OSU offensive line hadn't blocked so well...

...why Michigan would have SMOKED the Buckeyes.

Clearly...there should have been a different outcome. :D

Virginia Beach Reds
11-20-2006, 11:22 PM
I'm over the game on Sat and ready for the rematch in about 2 months!

GO BLUE!

Is USC gets beat by ND and Arkansas beats Florida, see ya in Glendale!

Unassisted
11-20-2006, 11:44 PM
I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that USC wins out convincingly, so that the media voters won't feel any compulsion to make a rematch happen. I don't see the SEC champ vaulting past the Wolverines and neither should the Fighting Irish.

Virginia Beach Reds
11-21-2006, 12:01 AM
The only team that should vault UM is USC if they beat ND. It should be an interesting game for sure. But, if they lose, and UM doesn't play OSU in Glendale, this is a farce. Neither Arkansas or Florida are in the same class as the top two right now. If USC does win out, good luck! 10 point dogs on a neutral field.

guttle11
11-21-2006, 12:07 AM
So is Michigan really so good that Ohio State would have to beat them twice in a row to win the National Title?

Ohio State clearly outplayed Michigan.

Next!

pedro
11-21-2006, 12:19 AM
If there is a rematch and Michigan does win I would think they should be co-champions.

Oh, and Max you started all this with the "if the buckeyes didn't have all those turnovers they would have blown out Michigan" so we're all living in "candyland" I guess.

guttle11
11-21-2006, 12:54 AM
If there is a rematch and Michigan does win I would think they should be co-champions.

Oh, and Max you started all this with the "if the buckeyes didn't have all those turnovers they would have blown out Michigan" so we're all living in "candyland" I guess.


It's a completely legit arguement. OSU moved the ball at will on the best defense in the country. Only OSU stopped OSU. The Bucks clearly were better than Michigan. They could have hung 63. Michigan had no answer.

OTOH, Michigan played very well on offense and was behind all game, and needed a VERY questionable call to help put the margin under 10.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 01:13 AM
So is Michigan really so good that Ohio State would have to beat them twice in a row to win the National Title?

Ohio State clearly outplayed Michigan.

Next!

By 3 points.

Yes, I know OSU outgained UofM in total yards, but 3 points is still 3 points. Ironically, I think this is the first spread OSU didn't cover all year.

I would love to see UofM get a rematch in the NC.

Imagine if/when UofM wins the rematch, then they both have a victory over each other, yet UofM would be the national champ.... poetic justice, I suppose.

LoganBuck
11-21-2006, 01:16 AM
Imagine if/when UofM wins the rematch, then they both have a victory over each other, yet UofM would be the national champ.... poetic justice, I suppose.


How is that poetic justice? Did OSU wrong Michigan or hurt their feelings some how?

dman
11-21-2006, 07:33 AM
The Fiesta Bowl is hardly going to be a neutral playing field for Michigan. There seem to be as many locals out there that are OSU fans as there are in Columbus.

registerthis
11-21-2006, 09:32 AM
By 3 points.

Yes, I know OSU outgained UofM in total yards, but 3 points is still 3 points. Ironically, I think this is the first spread OSU didn't cover all year.

OSU also sat on the ball for the last 2:30 after covering the onside kick at around the Michigan 45 yard line. It's not hard to imagine them putting more points on the board in that situation if they had truly wanted to. And this doesn't address the previously-mentioned three self-inflicted turnovers that the Buckeyes had, one of which essentially gave Michigan one of their TDs. This game was close, yes, but I also have no qualms about pointing out that the Bucks DID outplay Michigan, I don't think there's really any question about that.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 10:09 AM
How is that poetic justice? Did OSU wrong Michigan or hurt their feelings some how?

If UofM rematched OSU in the NC and won that game.... that's your poetic justice.

It makes the outcome of the game in Columbus moot to the outcome of the game in Glendale, should they rematch and UofM win.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 10:13 AM
OSU also sat on the ball for the last 2:30 after covering the onside kick at around the Michigan 45 yard line. It's not hard to imagine them putting more points on the board in that situation if they had truly wanted to. And this doesn't address the previously-mentioned three self-inflicted turnovers that the Buckeyes had, one of which essentially gave Michigan one of their TDs. This game was close, yes, but I also have no qualms about pointing out that the Bucks DID outplay Michigan, I don't think there's really any question about that.


Oh, the total yardage immediately tells me that UofM should have lost by more than 3, but they still only lost by 3. I remember when the line for the game originally came out and I heard people thinking it should have been more than 6.5, and closer to 10 or 11. I don't care how good a #1 team is playing at home vs the #2, you'd rarely see a double digit spread.

I really want to see a rematch. I want to see if Mike Hart's right that the outcome would be different, or if OSU would beat them by 2 scores.

The only team out there I think that could potentially beat OSU (aside from a UofM rematch) is USC, and they need to get by Brady Quinn and Co first.

registerthis
11-21-2006, 10:18 AM
If UofM rematched OSU in the NC and won that game.... that's your poetic justice.

I'm not sure that "poetic justice" is the term you're searching for here, Highlifeman...

From Wikipedia:

"Poetic justice is a literary device in which virtue is ultimately rewarded or vice punished, often in modern literature by an ironic twist of fate intimately related to the character's own conduct."

Michigan defeating OSU in the NC game might be "ironic," but it wouldn't really fall under the realm of "poetic justice."

max venable
11-21-2006, 10:21 AM
Oh, and Max you started all this with the "if the buckeyes didn't have all those turnovers they would have blown out Michigan" so we're all living in "candyland" I guess.
Really? Cuz I don't remember saying that. I hate that kind of woulda coulda shoulda stuff. The score is the ONLY thing that matters. I do, on the other hand, recall a U-M fan posting something about "if U-M doesn't give up those two long runs, it's completely different game"...or something to that effect.

About the turnovers, though...there were TWO completely unforced TOs. Bummer, but, yes, they count. And I don't recall ever having said OSU would have blown them out if it weren't for those.

Bottom line...it was a great game. U-M had their shot. They knew what they needed to do if they wanted to play for a NC...and they didn't get it done. End of story.

max venable
11-21-2006, 10:22 AM
Michigan defeating OSU in the NC game might be "ironic," but it wouldn't really fall under the realm of "poetic justice."
I would argue that it wouldn't be "ironic" either.

Spring~Fields
11-21-2006, 10:30 AM
I would argue that it wouldn't be "ironic" either.

"USC, Michigan, Florida, Arkansas, Notre Dame, Louisville, West Virginia, and Rutgers are all one loss teams. Every single one of them took destiny out of their hands by losing. Whoever gets the No. 2 spot is going to be playing on a second chance. Who is going to give Ohio State a second chance should they stumble after a seven week layoff?"

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/6192064

I thought that the author had a good point, "who is going to give Ohio State a second chance" ?

Danny Serafini
11-21-2006, 10:48 AM
Ironically, I think this is the first spread OSU didn't cover all year.

For what it's worth, they didn't cover against Illinois or, amazingly enough, Bowling Green either.

Roy Tucker
11-21-2006, 10:49 AM
Objectively speaking, the BCS championship game should match up the #1 and #2 teams in the nation. Period. Whether or not they have played before is immaterial. If a team can play the #1 team, lose, and still remain #2, then they must have some compelling qualities to keep them #2.

Subjectively speaking, as an OSU fan, I hate to play Michigan again. They are an excellent team and a true test of the Buckeyes mettle. However, we beat them once. That really ought to be enough. Football isn't a best-of-n series. Football games are singular events within the context of a season. You play a game, you win/lose, and that's that until next year (I view league championship games after a league season as a bastardization and pox upon college football).

But all of my second paragraph is whining. The BCS has a documented algorithm for determining the #1 and #2 teams (I was going to say "clear" but you can't use BCS and clear in the same sentence). OSU will remain atop the BCS as the #1 team. It appears that USC will become #2 if they win out. And if USC loses, it also appears that Michigan will stay #2.

And if that happens, bring 'em on. OSU will kick their butt again :pimp:

max venable
11-21-2006, 10:54 AM
A rematch diminishes--better yet, eliminates the importance of the first game. Why play the first one?

"Oh, that game you guys won, yeah, we know you already beat this team, but that game didn't count. This next one is the one that really counts."

Spring~Fields
11-21-2006, 10:59 AM
A rematch diminishes--better yet, eliminates the importance of the first game. Why play the first one?

"Oh, that game you guys won, yeah, we know you already beat this team, but that game didn't count. This next one is the one that really counts."

Well if Michigan gets two shots at being a BCS champion, so should Ohio State. Best of three series right?

Red Leader
11-21-2006, 11:25 AM
I agree with your post, Roy (except that last line, of course).


The system is setup so that #1 plays #2 in the BCS rankings at the end of the year in the National Championship game.

If USC loses to ND or UCLA, and Michigan claims the #2 spot at the year end poll, it doesn't matter that OSU and Michigan have played previously.

I understand you guys saying that Michigan had their chance, yada, yada, yada, but that's not the way the current system is setup.

Under the current system if Ohio State wants to claim themselves the National Champion then they have to win the National Championship game in Glendale, AZ in January.

I'm not saying the current system is correct, or shouldn't be changed, or whatever, that's another discussion entirely, and I think we'd all agree based on previous years and this year that it does need to be changed. But to say that if USC loses to ND or UCLA that Michigan doesn't deserve a 2nd chance at Ohio State is foolish. If Michigan is the team ranked #2 at the end of the year, then they deserve to go to the National Championship game, no matter who they are playing. According to some of you, the first game was on the brink of being a blowout the entire game, so what are you worried about? Should be an easy win for the Buckeyes, right?

registerthis
11-21-2006, 11:59 AM
No, if Michigan is the #2 team, they've earned the right to play in the NC game. No doubt about it.

I would just rather it be someone else.

Benihana
11-21-2006, 11:59 AM
How can a team be legit National Champs when they didn't win their conference?

No, No, No. Michigan has a great team, but USC, Florida, and potentially Arkansas would have a better claim, IMO.

The same way the Steelers can be World Champions when they didn't win their DIVISION! If the National Championship is supposed to feature the two best teams in the country, there is no question there should be a rematch. Notre Dame is a joke- Michigan beat them by ~30 points AT in their own house. No way can you put them in it. The only teams that even have any kind of argument are USC and Florida, and that is only if they win out. However, both of those teams lost to teams not in the top ten by more than a field goal. Michigan lost to the #1 team in the country on the road by 3 points. If USC and Florida lose a game in the next two weeks, its Michigan in a landslide.

As for those of you claiming that it would anticlimatic, would you agree the game with the closest line is the most likely to be an exciting, "climatic" game? Can you honestly say that any other team would project a smaller line than Michigan- especially after the game last Saturday? Think about last season, if there were to be one game to be played after the USC-Texas game to cement the National Champions, wouldn't you want to see USC-Texas AGAIN?? Its the same situation here, fellas.

5DOLLAR-BLEACHERBUM
11-21-2006, 12:04 PM
Heres my question. If OSU did not go into a prevent bend not break D at the end of the game like they did, would Michigan have scored. I know its a "what if" but it seems with all of the major sports talk radio and tv stations views of the matter "what ifs" are being used quite often and seem to hold alot of merit. So then you get into a whole new line of questions. Would everyone still believe Michigan deserved a rematch if the score was not 42 to 39 but instead 42 to 32. Second, no matter how good Ohio State is I think everyone knew it would be a close game, i mean come on it is the Ohio State- Michigan game for gods sake you always throw out the records for this one. Ohio State always seems to get a little grief and sometimes full blown disrespect from espn and others and I would hate for Ohio State to beat Michigan a second time, have USC route somebody like Florida or Notre Dame in their bowl game and have the powers that be ask. " Would USC have beat Ohio State if they just had the chance?" I say Michigan had that chance they lost no matter the score, make it official and bring on the Trojans!

Red Leader
11-21-2006, 12:07 PM
Heres my question. If OSU did not go into a prevent bend not break D at the end of the game like they did, would Michigan have scored. I know its a "what if" but it seems with all of the major sports talk radio and tv stations views of the matter "what ifs" are being used quite often and seem to hold alot of merit. So then you get into a whole new line of questions. Would everyone still believe Michigan deserved a rematch if the score was not 42 to 39 but instead 42 to 32. Second, no matter how good Ohio State is I think everyone knew it would be a close game, i mean come on it is the Ohio State- Michigan game for gods sake you always throw out the records for this one. Ohio State always seems to get a little grief and sometimes full blown disrespect from espn and others and I would hate for Ohio State to beat Michigan a second time, have USC route somebody like Florida or Notre Dame in their bowl game and have the powers that be ask. " Would USC have beat Ohio State if they just had the chance?" I say Michigan had that chance they lost no matter the score, make it official and bring on the Trojans!

You will get the Trojans if they win out.

If they don't, you wouldn't have the above argument.

Roy Tucker
11-21-2006, 12:20 PM
I would think if OSU beats whoever in the BCS championship game, there really won't be any room for debate as to who is #1. Yeah, there may some teams that *could* beat the Buckeyes, but they didn't. Either they lost directly to them or lost games that would have gotten them a shot. Anything else I'll tell you to go cry to your mama. Short of a playoff, OSU would be a definitive #1.

The true debate will be if USC wins out. Both USC and UM will have 1 loss. I may have to turn in my OSU alumni card for this, but if I were a poll voter, I'd still put UM at #2. But those kinds of debates won't be solved until there is a 4/8/16 team playoff.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 12:22 PM
For what it's worth, they didn't cover against Illinois or, amazingly enough, Bowling Green either.

:bang:

I already forgot about that Illinois game. And I couldn't remember the line on the BG game.

I so wanna see a rematch in the NC between these two and UofM win not b/c I hate OSU or love UofM (b/c neither of which is true), but rather to hear the moaning going on between both sides that they essentially "split", but UofM would have won the game that mattered.

Red Leader
11-21-2006, 12:23 PM
And please, stop with the "there were 3 unforced turnovers, and then we played prevent defense the whole 2nd half and allowed you guys to score, so that's why the game was even close," stuff.

As I saw the game, Ohio St. was looking at a 3rd and long, leading by 4 points, with around 4:30 to go in the game. The pass thrown was incomplete. Ohio State has to punt to Michigan. Wait. Personal Foul. OSU keeps the ball and scores, the rest is history.

If Michigan gets the ball back there, they have the opportunity to RUN the ball (which they had been doing all 2nd half at will), eat the clock and score late in the 4th quarter. Could OSU still have gotten the ball back and marched back down the field and scored or tied the game at the last minute? Possibly. But, please, don't tell me this game was a blowout. Michigan had a chance as late as 3:52 left in the game to win this one.

It just irritates me when I hear "this game was a total blowout," "Michigan is lucky they even came within 10 points of the Buckeyes," and stuff like that. All points, turnovers, runs, passes, penalties, etc count in that game. They count. And Michigan lost by 3.

guttle11
11-21-2006, 12:30 PM
And please, stop with the "there were 3 unforced turnovers, and then we played prevent defense the whole 2nd half and allowed you guys to score, so that's why the game was even close," stuff.

As I saw the game, Ohio St. was looking at a 3rd and long, leading by 4 points, with around 4:30 to go in the game. The pass thrown was incomplete. Ohio State has to punt to Michigan. Wait. Personal Foul. OSU keeps the ball and scores, the rest is history.

If Michigan gets the ball back there, they have the opportunity to RUN the ball (which they had been doing all 2nd half at will), eat the clock and score late in the 4th quarter. Could OSU still have gotten the ball back and marched back down the field and scored or tied the game at the last minute? Possibly. But, please, don't tell me this game was a blowout. Michigan had a chance as late as 3:52 left in the game to win this one.

It just irritates me when I hear "this game was a total blowout," "Michigan is lucky they even came within 10 points of the Buckeyes," and stuff like that. All points, turnovers, runs, passes, penalties, etc count in that game. They count. And Michigan lost by 3.


Michigan had one possesion in the fourth quater where they could take the lead, and they went 3 and out. OSU led the last 3 quarters of the game, their lead was never seriously threatened.

The margin may have been 3, but OSU was clearly the better team on the field. Michigan had their chance, and they lost. Simple as that. Why cheapen the Big Ten title by playing a rematch?

Bring on USC or the winner of FLA/ARK.

Red Leader
11-21-2006, 12:33 PM
Why cheapen the Big Ten title by playing a rematch?




Why is that cheapening the Big Ten title? If anything, having Michigan remain #2 to the end of the season only further strengthens owning the Big Ten title outright.

registerthis
11-21-2006, 12:38 PM
And please, stop with the "there were 3 unforced turnovers, and then we played prevent defense the whole 2nd half and allowed you guys to score, so that's why the game was even close," stuff.

As I saw the game, Ohio St. was looking at a 3rd and long, leading by 4 points, with around 4:30 to go in the game. The pass thrown was incomplete. Ohio State has to punt to Michigan. Wait. Personal Foul. OSU keeps the ball and scores, the rest is history.

If Michigan gets the ball back there...

So, we're supposed to ignore all the things (turnovers, penalties, defensive alignments, etc.) that helped UM score, but then play "what if..." with a personal foul call?

I see...

guttle11
11-21-2006, 12:39 PM
Why is that cheapening the Big Ten title? If anything, having Michigan remain #2 to the end of the season only further strengthens owning the Big Ten title outright.

I meant to add (and other conferences).

It cheapens it because it shows that conference titles mean nothing. That would be true if there where a playoff, but in a one game, winner take all format, I think you should have to be a conference champion to get the nod.(Well, ND being an exception).

Having a rematch is a middle finger to OSU, as well.

"Well Mr. Tressel, we realize you just beat Michigan, but we're not convinced you're better than them just yet. You'll have to do it again. Forget USC or the SEC winner, they don't matter"

How bad is that? OSU would have to beat Michigan TWICE for the National title, while Michigan would have to win only once. I never realized Michigan was that good.:rolleyes:

Cedric
11-21-2006, 12:43 PM
I meant to add (and other conferences).

It cheapens it because it shows that conference titles mean nothing. That would be true if there where a playoff, but in a one game, winner take all format, I think you should have to be a conference champion to get the nod.(Well, ND being an exception).

Having a rematch is a middle finger to OSU, as well.

"Well Mr. Tressel, we realize you just beat Michigan, but we're not convinced you're better than them just yet. You'll have to do it again. Forget USC or the SEC winner, they don't matter"

How bad is that? OSU would have to beat Michigan TWICE for the National title, while Michigan would have to win only once. I never realized Michigan was that good.:rolleyes:

How do you feel about a playoff then? I"m not picking on you because I don't know your opinion, but I've seen about a thousand Buckeye fans now say that Ohio State should NEVER play Michigan twice.

Sounds like people are either scared of Michigan or finally seeing the right things. :)

guttle11
11-21-2006, 12:48 PM
How do you feel about a playoff then? I"m not picking on you because I don't know your opinion, but I've seen about a thousand Buckeye fans now say that Ohio State should NEVER play Michigan twice.

Sounds like people are either scared of Michigan or finally seeing the right things. :)

I'd love a playoff. I'm all for it.

If their were a playoff, I wouldn't care about any rematches anywhere. You qualify, get seeded, and play. Winner take all.

However, the BCS is a one game scenario. Michigan had their shot. I think it's only fair to give someone else a shot before Michigan gets another one.

As a Buckeye fan I'm scared of no one this year. If they play well, they'll beat everyone. They're just better. And as a Buckeye fan I'd love to watch Lloyd crumble to the Senator for a 6th time. But I'm taking fandom out of the equation here. If USC and ND were 1 and 2 this week, I'd say the same thing...loser's out.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 12:50 PM
So, we're supposed to ignore all the things (turnovers, penalties, defensive alignments, etc.) that helped UM score, but then play "what if..." with a personal foul call?

I see...

Come on, reg - thats not what he is saying at all.

Red Leader is a Michigan fan on a site predominately populated by Ohio State fans. He's been nothing but class, a class a bunch of OSU fans on here have not shown. Yet, almost all I've read here is certainOSU fans saying this should have been a blowout, unforced turnovers, etc, etc. Yet you don't comment on that. But as soon as anyone like RL or pedro fight back you and others jump all over them for the "what if" game.

They are not the ones playing that card - they are using it as a rebuttal, yet somehow they still get attacked.

If people are allowed to say that this would have been a blowout if OSU "didn't shoot themselves in the foot" or the "only team that stopped OSU was OSU" why can't they rebut?

Puffy
11-21-2006, 12:52 PM
However, the BCS is a one game scenario. Michigan had their shot. I think it's only fair to give someone else a shot before Michigan gets another one.



So are you against conference championship games too then? Just curious, because most times the teams have already played once.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 12:57 PM
Did Ali-Frazier Two diminish Ali-Frazier One?

Personally, without a dog in this hunt, I'd like to see them play again. It was damn entertaining.

These two teams are a unique collection of athletes, many of whom will move on after this year. I'd like to see them play several more times, to tell you the truth.

Everyone is hung up on a protocol that the entire world agrees is flawed.

guttle11
11-21-2006, 01:00 PM
So are you against conference championship games too then? Just curious, because most times the teams have already played once.

Acutally yeah, I've never been in favor of them in football. I'd like to see football go back to the days of smaller conferences and a round robin conference schedule where you play everyone once. Best record wins.

After that, you tally up BCS points of the conference champions, and pit 1 vs 2.

registerthis
11-21-2006, 01:01 PM
Come on, reg - thats not what he is saying at all.

Red Leader is a Michigan fan on a site predominately populated by Ohio State fans. He's been nothing but class, a class a bunch of OSU fans on here have not shown. Yet, almost all I've read here is certainOSU fans saying this should have been a blowout, unforced turnovers, etc, etc. Yet you don't comment on that. But as soon as anyone like RL or pedro fight back you and others jump all over them for the "what if" game.

Hey, if it's wrong for one it's wrong for the other. Personally, I think it's fine to play the "what if" game. You can have all sorts of fun.

But he began his post by telling people to quit doing "what if" scenarios with the Buckeye turnovers, penalties, etc. and then turns right around and does it himself. That's all I took issue with. But if he wants to envision how things might have turned out had the ref not thrown a flag for the hit on Smith, more power to him.


They are not the ones playing that card - they are using it as a rebuttal, yet somehow they still get attacked.

Michigan fan martyrs? That's a new one.

guttle11
11-21-2006, 01:06 PM
Hey, if it's wrong for one it's wrong for the other. Personally, I think it's fine to play the "what if" game. You can have all sorts of fun.

But he began his post by telling people to quit doing "what if" scenarios with the Buckeye turnovers, penalties, etc. and then turns right around and does it himself. That's all I took issue with. But if he wants to envision how things might have turned out had the ref not thrown a flag for the hit on Smith, more power to him.

I think he was pointing out that there are "what ifs" on both sides and it's wrong to use any of them.

However, whether you include what ifs or not, I think it's clear OSU proved they were better. Why should they have to prove it yet again? Bring on USC if they win out, and if not, the FLA/ARK winner if they have 1 loss. If all three teams have 2 losses then, and only then, should there be rematch talk. Michigan's definitely proven to be a top 4 or 5 team, but others haven't gotten their fair shot at the top dog. I think that's the fairest way to do it.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 01:07 PM
I think he was pointing out that there are "what ifs" on both sides and it's wrong to use any of them.



exactly.

registerthis
11-21-2006, 01:08 PM
exactly.

Fair enough.

Red Leader
11-21-2006, 01:09 PM
Come on, reg - thats not what he is saying at all.

Red Leader is a Michigan fan on a site predominately populated by Ohio State fans. He's been nothing but class, a class a bunch of OSU fans on here have not shown. Yet, almost all I've read here is certainOSU fans saying this should have been a blowout, unforced turnovers, etc, etc. Yet you don't comment on that. But as soon as anyone like RL or pedro fight back you and others jump all over them for the "what if" game.

They are not the ones playing that card - they are using it as a rebuttal, yet somehow they still get attacked.

If people are allowed to say that this would have been a blowout if OSU "didn't shoot themselves in the foot" or the "only team that stopped OSU was OSU" why can't they rebut?


Thank you, Puffy.

I'll leave it at that.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 01:13 PM
Acutally yeah, I've never been in favor of them in football. I'd like to see football go back to the days of smaller conferences and a round robin conference schedule where you play everyone once. Best record wins.

After that, you tally up BCS points of the conference champions, and pit 1 vs 2.

Thats cool - I think the real problem, though, is that the conferences have expanded so much (money, money, money) that they HAVE to have these games. The SEC, the ACC, the Big 12 - its the only way to do it since they have to have two divisions.

The Big 10 (or should I say 11) wanted to do the same when they went after Notre Dame. I believe the thinking was two 6 team divisions and a conference championship.

But I do see your point and respect it.

Roy Tucker
11-21-2006, 01:29 PM
Acutally yeah, I've never been in favor of them in football. I'd like to see football go back to the days of smaller conferences and a round robin conference schedule where you play everyone once. Best record wins.

After that, you tally up BCS points of the conference champions, and pit 1 vs 2.

Word.

I've always thought the truer league champion was the regular season league leader. If not, why do you play the games?

But its all about the green, the geldt, the dineros, the moolah, the bucks, the money now. Major college football (and basketball) *****d itself out a long time ago to the God of TV $$$. We're just haggling over the price now.

gonelong
11-21-2006, 01:42 PM
As an OSU fan I am torn with rematch/no rematch.

On one hand our season is already successful, Big 10+1 Title, beat Michigan. Nice work, even if you don't win the NC. If an OSU/Mich rematch is played I really believe OSU would win it, however if they would lose it, your season is pretty much destroyed. Sure you have a Big 10 championship, but your nemesis has the NC. (Think Bengals/Steelers last season if you are a Bengals fan)

On the other hand, beating Michigan twice in one season, winning the Big10+1 Title (by beating Mich), and winning the NC (by beating Mich) would just be too, too much.

Personally I'd like to see USC win out so that OSU could take a crack at them. That is the game I really want to see.

GL

BuckWoody
11-21-2006, 01:54 PM
I'll sound of a little on the conference championship games. I do not care for them much. I'm more of a traditionalist and would like to see everyone in a conference play everyone else so that there is a clear cut conference champion. I don't care much for the re-match scenario (unless in a national playoff) for any conference.

I think about this every time the Big Ten talks about expanding and going to two divisions and having a championship game. Which division do you put OSU and UM into? Do you put them in opposite divisions so that you have the possibility of an OSU/UM championship game every year? Does that mean you can go a whole year without an OSU/UM game or set them up to play twice in some years? Do you put them in the same division so you're guaranteed an OSU/UM game every year? What if they are by for the two best teams in the Big Ten (which happens all the time) and then they have to go off and play Purdue or someone? All those scenarios stink, in my opinion. Substitute OSU/UM with any big-time rivals (Alabama/Auburn, Nebraska/Oklahoma, Tennessee/Florida, USC/UCLA, etc.etc.) and it's the same exact story.

We all saw a great game on Saturday between the two best teams in college football this year, I believe. The passions run deep on both sides as we can see here, as I'm sure they would if we had some die hard USC or Florida or Arkansas fans on here. As a college football fan, I do not want to see a rematch...we've already seen the game once and determined who was the better team (albeit by the smallest of margins). As a Buckeye fan, I think it was Apollo Creed who best sums up my feelings, "Ain't gonna be no rematch...Don't want one!"

registerthis
11-21-2006, 02:03 PM
But its all about the green, the geldt, the dineros, the moolah, the bucks, the money now. Major college football (and basketball) *****d itself out a long time ago to the God of TV $$$. We're just haggling over the price now.

Money is the only reason a travesty like the BCS exists. Talk about milking the cash cow.

reds_bengals1
11-21-2006, 02:04 PM
I'm sure it's already been posted, but if you don't win your conference, you shouldn't be able to win a national championship

GAC
11-21-2006, 10:02 PM
Come on, reg - thats not what he is saying at all.

Red Leader is a Michigan fan on a site predominately populated by Ohio State fans. He's been nothing but class, a class a bunch of OSU fans on here have not shown.

Oh c'mom Puffy. Show me where OSU fans have not shown class on this thread? Dicussing/debating "what if" scenarios in that game?

Those may be moot points obviously; but it's not classless.

And no one is saying they can't rebutt.

And disagreement, whichever side one is on, should not be defined as attacking.

Classless would be OSU fans comng on here and taunting, rubbing Michigan fans faces in the loss, and maybe throwing in some off-the-cuff remarks due to the extremeness of this rivalry.

That has not happened.

OSU fans on here, over and over, have shown nothing but respect for Michigan and their fans when they acknowldege they are probably the #2 team in the nation. Even after the loss.

Respect is paying the ultimate tribute to a great coach in Bo Schembechler.

When numerous OSU fans, on this thread, state that of all the teams vying for that shot at OSU in the NC game the one team they fear the most is Michigan.... that's the highest form of respect IMO.

And yeah - as a biased OSU fan I DO think that OSU would beat Michigan in the NC title game if it were to occur.

That is no more classless then Michigan RB Hart predicting the same for his team. ;

Puffy
11-22-2006, 12:28 AM
Whatever GAC - I was talking to Reg and he and I discussed it and came to an civil agreement. No where were you mentioned, and I didn't say you personally didn't show class, so why even respond? Feeling guilty? But whatever, RL was feeling beat up upon and I went to bat for him and i'd do it again. If you can't understand that, well not really my problem is it.

Oh wait, maybe your just sore cause once again you were wrong about something - Michigan dropping to 7. Or was it 6? You know, either 5 off or just 4.;)

GAC
11-22-2006, 09:51 AM
Whatever GAC - I was talking to Reg and he and I discussed it and came to an civil agreement. No where were you mentioned, and I didn't say you personally didn't show class, so why even respond?

First off Puffy, it's no big deal with me.

We all drew straws to see who was to respond to you, and I got the short one..... AGAIN! :lol:

But it was over this staement....


a class a bunch of OSU fans on here have not shown.

We hang around in packs, not bunches.


Oh wait, maybe your just sore cause once again you were wrong about something - Michigan dropping to 7. Or was it 6? You know, either 5 off or just 4.;)

Lets see where they are ranked after the teams below them finish their seasons. And my prediction was not based on where I THINK they should be because I have already stated that they are still the #2 team in the nation, but where I felt the BCS will end up putting them when it's all said and done.

I'd have made the same prediction if OSU had lost. I just felt the loser, after it's all said and done, would fall a few spots.

But I have no problem with being wrong. It's not like it was the first time, nor the last. ;)

But if you keep it up I'm gonna send you a copy of last year's Fiesta Bowl! :evil:

Puffy
11-22-2006, 11:03 AM
First off Puffy, it's no big deal with me.

Then why even bring it up? Why respond at all when it was clear I was talking to registerthis.



But it was over this staement....

OK, then lets pick apart some of the things you've said - just for ***** and giggles!



Lets see where they are ranked after the teams below them finish their seasons. And my prediction was not based on where I THINK they should be because I have already stated that they are still the #2 team in the nation, but where I felt the BCS will end up putting them when it's all said and done.

Hmmmm, now its lets see where they rank after the regular season is over when before (and the reason I mentioned it, ya know, when you were once again flat out wrong) went like this:


Michigan is gonna drop to #7 in the polls. Why?

Other then Rutgers and Michigan, every other team 1 thru 7 won. It doesn't matter WHO some of these teams played...

Florida over W. Carolina
ND over Army

Pretty clear you were stating in the here and now that after the loss Michigan was dropping to #7. Why else mention specific games.

But lets go forward. Lets see where they end up at the end of the regular season. They are two now and the only team close to them is USC. Most likely the only other teams that might be able to jump over them are Arkansas, Florida and Notre Dame. But gosh, those four teams play each other so two are eliminated right off the bat. Not to mention that Arkansas and Notre Dame are way, way behind them and even with wins they probably can't jump over Michigan - I don't see Notre Dame going over Michigan, no way, no how. Not unless they destroy USC and i don't see that happening. So that leaves us with the winner of the Arkansas and Florida game. Oh, and thats if Arkansas gets by LSU first, cause if they lose it hurts both Florida and Arkansas.

But lets say all goes perfect - USC wins out and Florida wins. And lets say they jump over Michigan. That puts Michigan 4th at worst. Still a long way from your fearless prediction of 7 or 6.

But hey, I'm sure you'll change the mitigating circumstances to make yourself look more right.;)



But if you keep it up I'm gonna send you a copy of last year's Fiesta Bowl! :evil:

Please do - and I'll send you a copy of NBC's television contract with ND. Ya know, the only team in the country with a great enough fan base where a television network gives them enough money where they don't need a conference :evil:

Chip R
11-22-2006, 12:29 PM
Well if Michigan gets two shots at being a BCS champion, so should Ohio State. Best of three series right?


3rd game in Ann Arbor. That'd be fair, right? :laugh:

bucksfan
11-22-2006, 01:20 PM
Thinking about this a little longer, and obviously coming from the perspective that I am an unapologetic OSU fan and alum :)
1) I am actually somewhat afraid of a rematch only for the reasons gonelong mantions above. I do believe the Buckeyes are a better overall team, but that certainly does not exclude the possibility of an extremely good Michigan team beating them at a neutral site. And that would bum me out, moreso than losing to one of the other #2 candidates would (just because it's Michigan)

2) It would be probably a bit more fun and less stressful for me to watch the Bucks play USC. I do believe we'd have a better chance of beating USC, but that is not necessarily why it would be more enjoyable or less stressful for me - it would be more the novelty of playing the west coast team kind of like the days of the Rose Bowl. However IMO that does go somewhat counter to what I thought the express purpose of this championship game was.

In general, this is just a unique scenario. The team that could be clearly in many people's minds still the #2 team has already lost to the #1 team. This loss, IMO rightfully so, does not hurt them to the extent that they fall below another team in the rankings. I mean, if they were clearly the #2 team and lost to clearly the #1 team, that in no way precludes them from being still clearly better than the rest of the lot (not saying they are or are not, just saying it can still be true).

And the national championship game being on a neutral site can change things as well. Michigans supposed shot at the national championship (as some are calling last week's game) came on the Buckeyes' home turf. IMO if Texas only had the one loss and were right up there in the rankings, they would have less a claim for a rematch than Michigan just due to the fact that they lost at home (and more convincingly).

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 01:28 PM
Thinking about this a little longer, and obviously coming from the perspective that I am an unapologetic OSU fan and alum :)
1) I am actually somewhat afraid of a rematch only for the reasons gonelong mantions above. I do believe the Buckeyes are a better overall team, but that certainly does not exclude the possibility of an extremely good Michigan team beating them at a neutral site. And that would bum me out, moreso than losing to one of the other #2 candidates would (just because it's Michigan)

2) It would be probably a bit more fun and less stressful for me to watch the Bucks play USC. I do believe we'd have a better chance of beating USC, but that is not necessarily why it would be more enjoyable or less stressful for me - it would be more the novelty of playing the west coast team kind of like the days of the Rose Bowl. However IMO that does go somewhat counter to what I thought the express purpose of this championship game was.

In general, this is just a unique scenario. The team that could be clearly in many people's minds still the #2 team has already lost to the #1 team. This loss, IMO rightfully so, does not hurt them to the extent that they fall below another team in the rankings. I mean, if they were clearly the #2 team and lost to clearly the #1 team, that in no way precludes them from being still clearly better than the rest of the lot (not saying they are or are not, just saying it can still be true).

And the national championship game being on a neutral site can change things as well. Michigans supposed shot at the national championship (as some are calling last week's game) came on the Buckeyes' home turf. IMO if Texas only had the one loss and were right up there in the rankings, they would have less a claim for a rematch than Michigan just due to the fact that they lost at home (and more convincingly).


Excellent post, bucksfan. :clap: :clap:

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 01:44 PM
3rd game in Ann Arbor. That'd be fair, right? :laugh:

Why not?

How many times has Smith and Tressel beat M no matter where they played? How many times does Smith have to beat them?
Try again Chip?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 01:55 PM
Thinking about this a little longer, and obviously coming from the perspective that I am an unapologetic OSU fan and alum :)
1) I am actually somewhat afraid of a rematch only for the reasons gonelong mantions above. I do believe the Buckeyes are a better overall team, but that certainly does not exclude the possibility of an extremely good Michigan team beating them at a neutral site. And that would bum me out, moreso than losing to one of the other #2 candidates would (just because it's Michigan)



Nothing to be afraid of, Tressel and his staff have not been "just lucky" as many times as they have been able to execute a plan to win over Michigan and neither has Smith and his teamates. Ohio State would be well prepared in another game against Michigan just as they have all along. I would not be so quick to discount the work of Tressel and his staff. Arizona would benefit the speed of Ohio State much more than that mess of a field condition at Ohio State.

If we look at the facts, not personalities, the season of like opponents, six of them were an indicator that Ohio State was going to beat the coaching staff and team of Michigan once again.

Ohio State - Michigan played 6 identical opponents

Ohio State
Penn State 28-6
+11 more points than Michigan scored, 1 touchdown better
Iowa 38-17
+18 more points than Michigan scored, 3 touchdowns better
Michigan St 38-7
+7 more points than Michigan scored, 1 touchdown better
Indiana 44-3
+10 more points than Michigan scored, 1 touchdown better
Minnesota 44-0
+16 more points than Michigan scored, 2 touchdowns better
Northwestern 54-10
+37 more points than Michigan scored, 6 touchdowns better

Ohio State scored 99 more points than Michigan scored against the same six opponents.
A 14 touchdown margin of difference

Defeated Michigan
Michigan 42-39

Michigan
Penn St 17-10
Iowa 20-6
Michigan St 31-13
Indiana 34-3
Minnesota 28-14
Northwestern 17-3

Lost to Ohio State
Ohio State 39-42

Points Scored - Offense vs. 6
Ohio State points scored - 246, 288 points if you include the Michigan victory. +102 points/6, positive +17 TD differential
Michigan points score - 147, 186 points if you include the Ohio State loss, -102 points/6, negative 17 TD differential

Points Allowed - Defense vs. 6
Ohio State points allowed - 43, 82 points allowed if you include the Michigan victory
Michigan points allowed - 49, 91 points allowed if you include the Ohio State loss

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 02:00 PM
What a perfect way to analyze two different teams by taking into consideration like opponents. Doesn't matter which week in the season those games took place, which games were played at home or away, which players played, which players were injured....

I should have seen it coming all along. ;)

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 02:03 PM
What a perfect way to analyze two different teams by taking into consideration like opponents. Doesn't matter which week in the season those games took place, which games were played at home or away, which players played, which players were injured....

I should have seen it coming all along. ;)

The facts are established on the field.

Why would anyone find it necessary to leave them out? I think we all know the answer to that one.

pedro
11-22-2006, 02:04 PM
Oh how soon OSU fans forget the 1990's. :)

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 02:16 PM
Why would anyone find it necessary to leave them out? I think we all know the answer to that one.


Honestly, how long have you followed OSU football? I'm not attacking you, I'm just asking. If it was before 2000, I'm surprised by your posts. Everyone knows that the Ohio State - Michigan game is a battle. It doesn't matter who comes into the game with an 11-0 record or who comes into the game with an 8-3 record. It's a battle. An almost always even battle. Where one or two plays can change the outcome of the game and determine whether the favorite or the underdog wins.

Besides all of the things I listed above, this is the Ohio State - Michigan game. Anything can and will happen. Comparing "like opponents" of teams that each played earlier in the year shows you nothing about what you're going to see on the field on that one Saturday in November.

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 02:21 PM
Oh how soon OSU fans forget the 1990's. :)

Not me I remember the bad seasons for Ohio State basketball and football. The good seasons come and go in sports. I even recall the Reds last six seasons, and I recall the good seasons too. It is just a part of sports.

Where is the class that congratulates Tressel and staff? Where is the recognition that they have earned for working their tails off and being fortunate enough to have a good season? The games are played on the field and the results are evident for all.

The season is not even over for most teams, the results are not even in and individuals have these premature discussions? Sports are not played on some message board, yet some games are.

On the baseball side it is well established to use stats to support any discussion, it can be no different here.

pedro
11-22-2006, 02:27 PM
I said that Tressel developed a good game plan. He did. It's not the first time I've seen him do it either. He's a good coach.

dabvu2498
11-22-2006, 02:31 PM
Not me I remember the bad seasons for Ohio State basketball and football. The good seasons come and go in sports. I even recall the Reds last six seasons, and I recall the good seasons too. It is just a part of sports.

Where is the class that congratulates Tressel and staff? Where is the recognition that they have earned for working their tails off and being fortunate enough to have a good season? The games are played on the field and the results are evident for all.

The season is not even over for most teams, the results are not even in and individuals have these premature discussions? Sports are not played on some message board, yet some games are.

On the baseball side it is well established to use stats to support any discussion, it can be no different here.


I think everyone here will give credit where credit is due.

But the incessant chest-thumping gets old. Think St. Louis Cardinal or Pittsburgh Steeler fans and you'll understand.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 02:31 PM
Where is the class that congratulates Tressel and staff? Where is the recognition that they have earned for working their tails off and being fortunate enough to have a good season? The games are played on the field and the results are evident for all.




You may be talking to pedro here, but I just wanted to point out that no posts that I have made have ever said anything bad about Jim Tressel. He is an outstanding coach. He is simply amazing as far as his in-game coaching goes, and for that matter, the way he prepares his teams, finds mismatches and advantages and actually works them into his gameplan. He is an outstanding coach. I will not argue that in the least.

The flipside to that is that by me saying those things doesn't mean I think Lloyd Carr is a moron. I think he's a very good coach as well and I think he's a great man, which was further cemented to me by his comments made at the Bo Schembechler memorial earlier this week.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 02:32 PM
I think everyone here will give credit where credit is due.

But the incessant chest-thumping gets old. Think St. Louis Cardinal or Pittsburgh Steeler fans and you'll understand.

Amen, and agreed.

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 02:33 PM
Comparing "like opponents" of teams that each played earlier in the year shows you nothing about what you're going to see on the field on that one Saturday in November.

No, no, that is not true. It is a perfectly acceptable measure of comparison, and then we have the final results of a game that was played on the field.

You and I did not play the game, we did not coach the games, nor did anyone else on the board. We are merely pseudo interlopers with a point or points that are not really relevant. It does not matter what we think.

It matters how the teams played and if they won or lost the game. The rest is just some sour grapes along with confirmation bias of a common fan, I am not going to be confused or disarmed by that old technique.

The games have been played and the results are in. What is the rest of this discussion really about? What is the motive? What is the intent? Who does it benefit?

Shouldn’t we wait to see how the rest of the games play out before drawing conclusions? Might USC, Notre Dame, Florida and Arkansas have something different to say? If not, why not?

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 02:36 PM
but I just wanted to point out that no posts that I have made have ever said anything bad about Jim Tressel. He is an outstanding coach. He is simply amazing as far as his in-game coaching goes, and for that matter, the way he prepares his teams, finds mismatches and advantages and actually works them into his gameplan. He is an outstanding coach. I will not argue that in the least.

The flipside to that is that by me saying those things doesn't mean I think Lloyd Carr is a moron. I think he's a very good coach as well and I think he's a great man, which was further cemented to me by his comments made at the Bo Schembechler memorial earlier this week.

I fully accept what you have written here and whole heartedly agree with your positive and constructive affirmations regarding all parties.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 02:37 PM
No, no, that is not true. It is a perfectly acceptable measure of comparison, and then we have the final results of a game that was played on the field.


Shouldn’t we wait to see how the rest of the games play out before drawing conclusions? Might USC, Notre Dame, Florida and Arkansas have something different to say? If not, why not?

If that's how you feel, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Oh, and most major sports outlets I've read have stated that the only team of consequence is USC. If they lose to Notre Dame or UCLA, Michigan goes to the National Championship. If USC wins out, they go to the National Championship. No other teams really have a legitimate shot at the National Championship. That's not my opinion, that's what I have read from college football experts. So OSU will be playing either USC or Michigan in the National Championship game. We just don't know which one they'll be playing. We could know as early as this Saturday night, though.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 02:41 PM
And with that, I'm done posting about the Ohio State - Michigan game that took place last Saturday. It's over, Ohio State won, and I'm done talking about that game.

Like everyone else, I'll wait until all the scores come in and wait to hear who is chosen to play OSU in the championship game.

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 02:50 PM
If that's how you feel, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Oh, and most major sports outlets I've read have stated that the only team of consequence is USC. If they lose to Notre Dame or UCLA, Michigan goes to the National Championship. If USC wins out, they go to the National Championship. No other teams really have a legitimate shot at the National Championship. That's not my opinion, that's what I have read from college football experts. So OSU will be playing either USC or Michigan in the National Championship game. We just don't know which one they'll be playing. We could know as early as this Saturday night, though.

This is true, very true. I have read similiar. They don't seem to give enough respect or consideration to Florida, Arkansas and Notre Dame, basically they all point to USC. But we know that it could possibly be different, and those teams also could win a contest in Arizona. Whoever really thought that Ohio State would beat Miami that one year, not me, and who was really sure that Texas could beat that great team from USC last year, not me. Anything can happen.

But once again I draw from what all of us have written on the football theme threads, that the very differences that we as a sample group speak to, support a future need for a playoff system of the top X number of teams.

My premise from the get go was that this Ohio State vs. Michigan being 1-2 in the polls and coming from the same conference was going to exploit another flaw in the BSC Championship game, and it is.

I think that USC, Arkansas or even West Virginia can beat Ohio State, but what do I know? I don't know anything until after the game is played and the results are in.

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 02:53 PM
And with that, I'm done posting about the Ohio State - Michigan game that took place last Saturday. It's over, Ohio State won, and I'm done talking about that game.

Like everyone else, I'll wait until all the scores come in and wait to hear who is chosen to play OSU in the championship game.

Well I know and feel that you have done an excellent job writing and communicating points that are well stated and have a great deal of merit. I know they give me fits. :)

Puffy
11-22-2006, 03:00 PM
This is true, very true. I have read similiar. They don't seem to give enough respect or consideration to Florida, Arkansas and Notre Dame, basically they all point to USC. But we know that it could possibly be different, and those teams also could win a contest in Arizona. Whoever really thought that Ohio State would beat Miami that one year, not me, and who was really sure that Texas could beat that great team from USC last year, not me. Anything can happen.



As a huge Notre Dame fan I don't think they deserve a shot. They've won the games they should have won, but never too impressively. I have no doubt Notre Dame could move the ball and score on OSU. But I have even less doubt that OSU could score at will on ND's defense and ND would lose somewhere around 45-26 or so.

I see the same thing with Florida. Won the games they should have won, but never were truly impressive. I don't see them hanging with OSU.

Arkansas, well, they are the only team who I think might deserve that shot over Michigan assuming USC loses. They already have been impressive, but if they win out (LSU and Florida) I just don't see how a team who played the schedule they did, won 11 or 12 in a row, and went undefeated in the SEC doesn't deserve a shot. How they fare against OSU I don't know - but if Mike Hart can run against OSU then I think McFadden can as well. The difference is Michigan had Henne to keep them honest, Arkansas doesn't. However, teams have been stacking the line for weeks and haven't stopped him (cept for Saturday, and he still made an impact on special teams) so who knows.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 03:06 PM
As a huge Notre Dame fan I don't think they deserve a shot. They've won the games they should have won, but never too impressively. I have no doubt Notre Dame could move the ball and score on OSU. But I have even less doubt that OSU could score at will on ND's defense and ND would lose somewhere around 45-26 or so.

I see the same thing with Florida. Won the games they should have won, but never were truly impressive. I don't see them hanging with OSU.

Arkansas, well, they are the only team who I think might deserve that shot over Michigan assuming USC loses. They already have been impressive, but if they win out (LSU and Florida) I just don't see how a team who played the schedule they did, won 11 or 12 in a row, and went undefeated in the SEC doesn't deserve a shot. How they fare against OSU I don't know - but if Mike Hart can run against OSU then I think McFadden can as well. The difference is Michigan had Henne to keep them honest, Arkansas doesn't. However, teams have been stacking the line for weeks and haven't stopped him (cept for Saturday, and he still made an impact on special teams) so who knows.

Agree with all of this. The problem I think Ohio State creates in a matchup is that I don't think you can simply run the ball, try to eat the clock, play the possession game and beat OSU. I think if that were the case, you would have seen a lot more of Mike Hart last Saturday in the 1st half. I'll give the UM coaches credit and agree with them that you simply just can't run and stay in the game with OSU. I think you *have* to have some sort of aerial attack as well, and preferably a good one. Ohio State is going to score on every defense that has a chance to make it to the NC game, and likely score often. If you're running the ball 80% of the game, you are just wasting the time you need to catch back up with them. Now, if you can manage to score early on OSU and go up by 10 or so, then you can run on them, at least until they catch back up with you..... Ahhh! Somebody's gotta have a good gameplan to stop them. :laugh:

dabvu2498
11-22-2006, 03:13 PM
I just read something impressive. Florida will have played 10 bowl-eligible teams out of their 13 games.

And they're still not going anywhere.

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 03:30 PM
As a huge Notre Dame fan I don't think they deserve a shot. They've won the games they should have won, but never too impressively. I have no doubt Notre Dame could move the ball and score on OSU. But I have even less doubt that OSU could score at will on ND's defense and ND would lose somewhere around 45-26 or so.

I see the same thing with Florida. Won the games they should have won, but never were truly impressive. I don't see them hanging with OSU.

Arkansas, well, they are the only team who I think might deserve that shot over Michigan assuming USC loses. They already have been impressive, but if they win out (LSU and Florida) I just don't see how a team who played the schedule they did, won 11 or 12 in a row, and went undefeated in the SEC doesn't deserve a shot. How they fare against OSU I don't know - but if Mike Hart can run against OSU then I think McFadden can as well. The difference is Michigan had Henne to keep them honest, Arkansas doesn't. However, teams have been stacking the line for weeks and haven't stopped him (cept for Saturday, and he still made an impact on special teams) so who knows.

I don't question anything that you have written here, seems very matter of fact accurate to me.

I have thought about what each of you have written, and researched in follow up, I guess my hang up is the game last Saturday. Somewhere in the discussion a discounting, a devaluing of that game has a hint of ringing out or is implied if not directly expressed.

I find it difficult to reasonably accept the results of previous games or the next game if last Saturday's game has no value, merit, or worth, basically there is a call to just toss that one out. So do we just toss out the next game and the next if the outcome is unappreciated by others?

GAC
11-22-2006, 03:31 PM
Oh how soon OSU fans forget the 1990's. :)

I sure don't pedro. Though I would very much like to, and the number of times were were positioned and then got beat by Michigan.

That is why I made no predictions on the other thread. If one of these teams was 4-8 I'd still make no predictions. This is simply a special rivalry IMHO, and these two teams ALWAYS get themselves up for this game.

Let OSU fans have their "moment" and celebrate. It's not like we haven't earned it this year. And I'd say the very same thing to the Michigan fans or anyone else if their team earned the right to play in the NC game.

As long as they are not getting "in your face" stupid and obnoxious. And I don't really think that has gone on on this thread.

And as far as Red Leader goe....

I met him a couple years ago at a RZ Gathering. He's a good dude. And I personally apologize for anyone who may have said something that appeared to be "over the top"

Here's a pic of RL and Puffy, and I just have one question..... what's with that T-shirt guy? :lol:

joshnky
11-22-2006, 03:34 PM
I just read something impressive. Florida will have played 10 bowl-eligible teams out of their 13 games.

And they're still not going anywhere.

And USC will have played 10 bowl eligible teams out of 12 games, including a non conference schedule that includes Notre Dame, @ Arkansas (SEC West Champ), and @ Nebraska (Big 12 North Champ). Does Florida deserve to go to the NC over them?

GAC
11-22-2006, 03:38 PM
But hey, I'm sure you'll change the mitigating circumstances to make yourself look more right.;)

I think I said in my last response that I've been wrong before, and it won't be the first nor last time. ;)



Please do - and I'll send you a copy of NBC's television contract with ND. Ya know, the only team in the country with a great enough fan base where a television network gives them enough money where they don't need a conference :evil:

Who has said anything about ND's fan base, or that it isn't one of the biggest/best in the country?

I'd love to have to you in the Big 10.... so would Indiana and Northwestern! :evil:

Danny Serafini
11-22-2006, 03:49 PM
With a 6-6 record putting you in a bowl game now the term "bowl eligible" doesn't quite hold the weight it used to.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 03:51 PM
Here's a pic of RL and Puffy, and I just have one question..... what's with that T-shirt guy? :lol:

The t-shirt was worn in support of Adam Dunn being a Texan. The fact that I knew it might rub some OSU fans the wrong way was just a bonus. Honestly, I don't think TEX-OSU had played yet when that picture was taken. Looks like I've dropped about 25-30 lbs since then as well. Good Lord.

RFS62
11-22-2006, 03:58 PM
Hey, I went to WVU and I'd love to see them in the final game. But we lost a game we should have won, and that's just the way it goes.

Even with my rooting interest in the Mountaineers, I'd still like to see a rematch of Ohio State and Michigan, because I still think they're the two best teams in the country.

Also, you guys are cracking me up. Good thing they don't allow guns on teh interweb.

joshnky
11-22-2006, 03:58 PM
With a 6-6 record putting you in a bowl game now the term "bowl eligible" doesn't quite hold the weight it used to.

Agreed. The SEC looks strong because they have so many bowl eligible teams but there is some fault in that logic when you look at a team like Alabama. Only 2 wins in conference but 4 non conference wins against La-Monroe, Florida Int., Duke and Hawaii all at home. Think having an extra game to schedule against Fl. Int. might have helped make them bowl eligible? Two of those teams are winless and La-M only has 2 wins. Hawaii is the only decent team of the bunch but that is one long flight to Tuscaloosa.

Then you have South Carolina with 3 wins in the SEC and three nonconference wins against stellar teams such as Wofford, Florida Atlantic, and MTSU.

That extra non conference game has helped quite a few teams gain bowl eligibility, especially those in conferences that don't play anyone out of conference, ala SEC.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 04:07 PM
Oh, and most major sports outlets I've read have stated that the only team of consequence is USC. If they lose to Notre Dame or UCLA, Michigan goes to the National Championship. If USC wins out, they go to the National Championship. No other teams really have a legitimate shot at the National Championship. That's not my opinion, that's what I have read from college football experts. So OSU will be playing either USC or Michigan in the National Championship game. We just don't know which one they'll be playing. We could know as early as this Saturday night, though.

I found a scenario where someone other than Michigan or USC could make it to the National Championship game.

It's unlikely, but could still happen:

The scenario: Florida wins out, USC beats ND, but loses to UCLA.

USC would be out of it, a 2nd ND loss would hurt Michigan, especially if it's not close and USC loses the next week. Would be real close between Michigan and Florida in this case, with maybe an edge towards Florida.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 04:24 PM
Same scenario with Arkansas:

Arkansas wins out, USC beats ND, but loses to UCLA.

USC out of it, Michigan wins the bid over Arkansas as Arkansas has one loss and lost to USC (who now would have 2 losses) and Michigan who has 1 loss with it's one loss to an undefeated #1 team on the road wins the bid.

So, it looks like the scenarios are:

USC wins out = they are in. They control their own destiny.

USC loses to ND - Michigan is in, no matter what else happens.

USC beats ND, but loses to UCLA - Florida could sneak in, but if Florida loses any of their remaining games, Michigan is in.

It looks like USC's games are the ones to watch the next 2 weeks.

USC @home vs ND this Saturday at 8pm.
USC @ UCLA, Saturday, Dec. 2nd at 4:30pm.

Chip R
11-22-2006, 04:42 PM
Not me I remember the bad seasons for Ohio State basketball and football. The good seasons come and go in sports. I even recall the Reds last six seasons, and I recall the good seasons too. It is just a part of sports.

Where is the class that congratulates Tressel and staff? Where is the recognition that they have earned for working their tails off and being fortunate enough to have a good season? The games are played on the field and the results are evident for all.



Where was the class that congratulated Texas last year? No excuses from tOSU fans during that game.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39882

Spring~Fields
11-22-2006, 04:57 PM
The fact that I knew it might rub some OSU fans the wrong way was just a bonus.

Oh, oh, is that what all of this is about? Oh ok, :) I could see that from Chip, but you? I never would have guessed. ;)

Ron Madden
11-22-2006, 05:29 PM
I say Yes. IMHO, It is a "good thing" to have the two best teams play for the Title.

Red Leader
11-22-2006, 05:44 PM
As some have already said, it's happened before:


Let’s flash back to 1996. No. 2 Florida State has just beaten No. 1 Florida 24-21 in a mega-game in Tallahassee. The Seminoles are one step away from a national title. But after a series of crazy circumstances, the Seminoles are forced into a Sugar Bowl rematch against Florida. What happens? Florida dominates, 52-20. Nobody remembers the mega-game or Florida State’s 11-0 regular season.


Let's all just enjoy the games this weekend and next and let them play on the field work itself out. In the end, either USC, Michigan, or Florida will be declared the #2 team in the nation with a chance to play Ohio State for the Championship.

RedFanAlways1966
11-22-2006, 09:50 PM
As some have already said, it's happened before:



Let's all just enjoy the games this weekend and next and let them play on the field work itself out. In the end, either USC, Michigan, or Florida will be declared the #2 team in the nation with a chance to play Ohio State for the Championship.

That does it... they should cancel the Title Game and just declare OSU the outright champ!! :D

max venable
11-22-2006, 11:12 PM
I say Yes. IMHO, It is a "good thing" to have the two best teams play for the Title.

Buckeyes fans would never accept the finality of a second-game loss, and really, how could you blame them? The Buckeyes won the game they had to win to play for the title; If a rematch were to occur, Michigan will have "earned" its way into the title game by losing a close game.

I just can't see how anyone can justify "earning" a shot at the NC by losing a game. :dunno:

OldRightHander
11-23-2006, 12:21 AM
no conference title
no shot at National title

Colorado whips Nebraska in the conference title game in 2001. Nebraska plays in the national title game. :confused:

jmcclain19
11-23-2006, 12:24 AM
Colorado whips Nebraska in the conference title game in 2001. Nebraska plays in the national title game. :confused:

Don't forget when KSU whupped Oklahoma a couple of years ago, only to see OU get a berth in the BCS Championship game.

Ron Madden
11-23-2006, 01:14 AM
Buckeyes fans would never accept the finality of a second-game loss, and really, how could you blame them? The Buckeyes won the game they had to win to play for the title; If a rematch were to occur, Michigan will have "earned" its way into the title game by losing a close game.

I just can't see how anyone can justify "earning" a shot at the NC by losing a game. :dunno:

I understand your point and I agree to some extent.

I believe the Buckeyes the #1 team in the nation and that Michigan is #2 based on the entire season. Just because they belong to the same conference shouldn't change that. (JMHO)

I have all the faith in the world the Buckeyes can win a rematch. :beerme:

GAC
11-23-2006, 06:18 AM
So it seems to me, from browsing this thread discussion, that the SEC is either basically out of the title game or it's people's opinion that the winner of the Florida-Arkansas game does not deserve to be there IF USC loses this weekend?

I might tend to disagree depending on the score of that SEC game. ;)

Again... how much do early season losses, and even to contending teams like USC (Arkansas) effect the BCS system?

Jpup
11-25-2006, 12:51 PM
I don't have a dog in the fight, but Ohio State and Michigan are the 2 best teams. Notre Dame would be my 3rd choice. We'll see how tonight goes, but I really don't see SC winning and I don't think they should be in the NC game even if they do.

MWM
11-25-2006, 10:13 PM
Well, it ain't looking good for Michigan. Notre Dame is in over their head in this game. I love Charlie Weis and Notre Dame is back for good, IMO. But they'll have to wait a couple of years for it to materialize. He needs time to build a defense, because this year's is just bad. USC's offesne has been decent this year, but has struggled to be consistent. They've done whatever they've wanted to tonight. This one is going to get ugly.

savafan
11-25-2006, 10:18 PM
1st and goal on the 4 yard line and ND fumbles away the ball....

savafan
11-25-2006, 10:22 PM
Okay, block the punt, pass for a touchdown...that works!

MWM
11-25-2006, 10:22 PM
ND scores and closes the gap to 21-10 halfway through the 2nd quarter.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 10:24 PM
Horrible playcalling cost USC a TD. Why not run the freaking ball from our own 8? Damnit.

MWM
11-25-2006, 10:27 PM
OBM, when did you become such a fan of USC?

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 10:29 PM
OBM, when did you become such a fan of USC?

I became a fan in 2001(Carson's junior year). Why?

MWM
11-25-2006, 10:31 PM
Just curious! I thought at one point you said you became a fan a few years ago after their split title with LSU.

Cedric
11-25-2006, 10:32 PM
I'd be surprised if either of these teams could compete with Ohio State. USC is very limited in experience in the back seven and they have issues running the ball.

I hate saying it, but Michigan is the only team I would give a true 50/50 shot at Ohio State.

MWM
11-25-2006, 10:34 PM
I don't know. USC has the raw talent. Give them a month to prepare and they'll be ready to play. Look at what they did to Arkansas when they had all of camp to prepare.

I'd put OSU-USC at 60-40 OSU. But I agree, I'd put OSU-Mich at 50-50.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 10:35 PM
Wow. We are giving this game away. It should be no worse than 28-3 right now.

MWM
11-25-2006, 10:37 PM
It just seems weird that guy from the midwest would become a fan of the best program in the country sometime in the last few years. Even to the pint of referring to them as "we." Nothing personal.

Slyder
11-25-2006, 10:46 PM
I voted no but I want to make a caveat, if Florida, USC, and ND all lose a game between now and next week then you have no case for any other teams except maybe Louisville.

But Michigan had an opportunity to beat OSU and they didnt, end of story. I didn't even think it was "that great". Because if you take out the 2 bad snaps from center in shotgun due to the cast (which he wore and effectively snapped with all season) you are looking at a potential drumming. Plus OSU was doing pretty much anything they wanted on offense and letting Michigan take its time since they had a big lead most of the game. If you give them a rematch why not give Louisville a second chance against Rutgers and then if Louisville wins they get a chance at the national title, or USC vs Oregon State, give Fla a second chance against Auburn. Until there is a playoff (like in every other sport) no team should get a rematch when there isnt a MAJOR catastrophic crime like the Pac 10 game with Oklahoma involved.

The polls are a complete joke, WVU was #3 and fell to #10 after losing ON THE ROAD at then #5 Louisville, while Michigan lost on the road in a similar fashion to OSU and doesnt budge? Thats BS from the BcS. Louisville loses ON THE ROAD to then #15 Rutgers on a 2nd chance last second field goal and falls to 10, but yet Michigan doesnt budge? Thats not even bringing Florida's loss to Auburn ON THE ROAD. Im not saying Michigan should have plummeted due to their loss but that loss to OSU is not greater than losses of other teams in the top 10 heading into this week.
Plus on a little greedy side, (before today) I wanted WVU to have a chance to go toe to toe with Michigan or another power like they got in Ga at the Sugar Bowl last year. I know they lost today at home but I still feel that WVU would give Michigan as good of a game as anyone but now they arent going to get that chance b/c they blew it today.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 10:55 PM
It just seems weird that guy from the midwest would become a fan of the best program in the country sometime in the last few years. Even to the pint of referring to them as "we." Nothing personal.

It may seem weird to you, but I actually did become a fan before USC returned to the dominant program they are. Believe it or not. I can tell you when exactly I became a fan of USC. It was a game against Arizona State about half way through the 2001 season, I was flipping through the channels and found the SC-ASU game. I was intrigued by the athletic WR's of SC(Colbert and Kelly) and Palmer, who threw for around 300 yards that day, IIRC. USC's high powered offense(which I am a sucker for) made me a fan. Sadly I found out that that big offense didn't show up much that season for SC. I've been a fan ever since. Although admittedly I didn't decide to finally fork out the 50$ a month to watch every SC game on TV until after the first NC by SC in 2003.

Cedric
11-25-2006, 10:58 PM
It may seem weird to you, but I actually did become a fan before USC returned to the dominant program they are. Believe it or not. I can tell you when exactly I became a fan of USC. It was a game against Arizona State about half way through the 2001 season, I was flipping through the channels and found the SC-ASU game. I was intrigued by the athletic WR's of SC(Colbert and Kelly) and Palmer, who threw for around 300 yards that day, IIRC. USC's high powered offense(which I am a sucker for) made me a fan. Sadly I found out that that big offense didn't show up much that season for SC. I've been a fan ever since. Although admittedly I didn't decide to finally fork out the 50$ a month to watch every SC game on TV until after the first NC by SC in 2003.

Bandwagon.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 10:59 PM
I'm still ticked that Kiffen called three consecutive pass plays from his own 8 yard line. Stupid calls that eventually cost SC a TD. It could be around 28-3 right now.

But if it's and but's were candy and nuts, we would all have a Merry little Christmas.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 11:00 PM
Bandwagon.

Yeah, bangwagon. SC went 6-6 that year and lost to freakin' Utah in the Las Vegas Bowl. Yeah, I jumped all over that 6-6 bandwagon.

Cedric
11-25-2006, 11:02 PM
You guys played tough that year though. You gave it all you had.

:) just giving you a hard time

MWM
11-25-2006, 11:37 PM
I wish I were less picky about the sports teams I actively root for. It would sure make my sports life much more enjoyable. I've never been able to become a true fan of a team unless they were local or I had a real tie to the team, such as being an alumnus. but I root for pretty much ALL the local teams: Ohio State, UC, Xavier, Miami of Ohio, Reds, Bengals. I'm a local fan and nothing else.

The only exception is the Bulls of the late 8s and 90s, which was more about Jordan than the actual team. But I had no NBA team arond to root for, so I wasn't invested in any other team.

And how do you become a fully invested fan of a team based on watching one game? That type of fandom has to be cemented over time.

savafan
11-25-2006, 11:40 PM
Notre Dame scores to make it an 11 point game

USC up 28-17 with 1:57 remaining in the 3rd quarter.

MWM
11-25-2006, 11:42 PM
I got to give Notre Dame's coaches credit. This game could have gotten ugly, but they've hung in and made a game out of it.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 11:47 PM
I wish I were less picky about the sports teams I actively root for. It would sure make my sports life much more enjoyable. I've never been able to become a true fan of a team unless they were local or I had a real tie to the team, such as being an alumnus. but I root for pretty much ALL the local teams: Ohio State, UC, Xavier, Miami of Ohio, Reds, Bengals. I'm a local fan and nothing else.

The only exception is the Bulls of the late 8s and 90s, which was more about Jordan than the actual team. But I had no NBA team arond to root for, so I wasn't invested in any other team.

And how do you become a fully invested fan of a team based on watching one game? That type of fandom has to be cemented over time.

I started following them via the internet after that.

Steve Smith just dropped a TD that would have put this game away for good.

max venable
11-25-2006, 11:49 PM
I got to give Notre Dame's coaches credit. This game could have gotten ugly, but they've hung in and made a game out of it.

ND's coaches are clearly in over their heads...much like the Fiesta Bowl last year.

ND is being exposed. They've only played two legitmately good teams this year and gotten thumped by both.

OSU vs. USC in the BCS.

savafan
11-25-2006, 11:50 PM
I think USC is about to put this one away.

OnBaseMachine
11-25-2006, 11:53 PM
I think USC is about to put this one away.

Nah, stupid playcalling is preventing them from putting it away. Pass first down, run on 2nd and long everytime. So predictable. This game should be long over by now.

MWM
11-25-2006, 11:59 PM
OBM, you crack me up. Just once I'd like to see you acknowledge that there's another team on the field.

If they end up losing in the title game, I'm sure it will have nothing to do with OSU being the better team.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:05 AM
OBM, you crack me up. Just once I'd like to see you acknowledge that there's another team on the field.

If they end up losing in the title game, I'm sure it will have nothing to do with OSU being the better team.

USC is calling some bad plays, wouldn't ya say? They have been so predictable this game.

Oh, and I feel that OSU is the better team right now. I really didn't expect SC to reach a NC game this year. My hope was for a Rose Bowl appearance. Next year is our year.

MWM
11-26-2006, 12:08 AM
I feel bad for Michigan. There's just no way you can keep USC out of the title game with their resume, but based on watching both teams several times this year, I think Michigan is better and would beat USC if they played. But that's the wonder of the BCS.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:08 AM
Dwayne Jarrett is incredible. I love that guy. Kiffen finally decided to mix it up a bit, run on first down, pass on second down and goods things happened.

MWM
11-26-2006, 12:09 AM
I don't know, the play calling has looked pretty damn good for USC tonight.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:09 AM
I feel bad for Michigan. There's just no way you can keep USC out of the title game with their resume, but based on watching both teams several times this year, I think Michigan is better and would beat USC if they played. But that's the wonder of the BCS.

People said the same thing in 2003 though.

paintmered
11-26-2006, 12:11 AM
It's pretty safe to say that if Troy Smith didn't have the Heisman wrapped up yet, he does after tonight.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:12 AM
Keith Rivers just got flagged for hitting a ND reciever too hard.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:15 AM
It's pretty safe to say that if Troy Smith didn't have the Heisman wrapped up yet, he does after tonight.

Absolutely.

guttle11
11-26-2006, 12:16 AM
David Bruton, ND's backup saftey, is from Miamisburg, Ohio.

Poor kid is not ready for what he's in. He's getting burnt like toast.

RBA
11-26-2006, 12:16 AM
A lot of homers here.

USC by 20 over Ohio State. :D

MWM
11-26-2006, 12:20 AM
People said the same thing in 2003 though.

Well, you never know until they play. It's just my opinion, but based on watching both teams play this year and how they've played this year, I think OSU *should* beat USC. Not a blowout, but by a decent margin. I'd say the same with Michigan. But USC has tremendous athletes, probably better than any program in the country. And any time you have the athletes the likes of USC, you can beat anyone on any day. The better team doesn't always win. I think last year's National Championship game was a good example. Again, my opinion only, but I thought USC was a better team and had they played Texas 10 times, they'd have won 7. But the way that game unfolded, USC ended up blowing it and losing the game. Anytime you get great athletes on both sidelines, anything can happen.

And I thought USC was the best team in the country at the end of the 2002 season, if that's the one you're talking about. I certainly didn't think Michigan was better that year.

MWM
11-26-2006, 12:26 AM
Brent Musberger is awful. He's approaching Tim McCarver awful.

paintmered
11-26-2006, 12:28 AM
Well, that's game.

An onside-kick returned for a touchdown. Those are always fun to watch.

MWM
11-26-2006, 12:28 AM
I can't believe Colerain lost tonight. I think everyone, apparently Colerain players included, thought they'd cruise to the State Title.

RBA
11-26-2006, 12:29 AM
Now that's speed, when your big guys can return the kickoff for a TD. ;)

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:29 AM
Well, you never know until they play. It's just my opinion, but based on watching both teams play this year and how they've played this year, I think OSU *should* beat USC. Not a blowout, but by a decent margin. I'd say the same with Michigan. But USC has tremendous athletes, probably better than any program in the country. And any time you have the athletes the likes of USC, you can beat anyone on any day. The better team doesn't always win. I think last year's National Championship game was a good example. Again, my opinion only, but I thought USC was a better team and had they played Texas 10 times, they'd have won 7. But the way that game unfolded, USC ended up blowing it and losing the game. Anytime you get great athletes on both sidelines, anything can happen.

And I thought USC was the best team in the country at the end of the 2002 season, if that's the one you're talking about. I certainly didn't think Michigan was better that year.

I'm talking about 2003. Everyone thought Michigan would beat USC in the Rose Bowl and SC ended up beating Michigan 28-14.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:30 AM
Brent Musberger is awful. He's approaching Tim McCarver awful.

Yep. I miss Keith Jackson.

paintmered
11-26-2006, 12:30 AM
I can't believe Colerain lost tonight. I think everyone, apparently Colerain players included, thought they'd cruise to the State Title.


Woah! Colerain got beat?!? Who beat them? :eek:

paintmered
11-26-2006, 12:31 AM
Brent Musberger is awful. He's approaching Tim McCarver awful.


I think this is now appropriate for the thread. :D


WARNING!

Play the Brent Musberger drinking game at your own risk. It is conceivable your whole party will be passed out with 8 mins remaining in the 1st quarter.

*Note: Partner is spelled "Pardner," because that's the way Brent says it.

Rule #1: "The Pardner" A person is picked to be the Pardner at the beginning of the game. The first time Brent says "Pardner," the Pardner has to take 1 drink, and then picks someone else to be the Pardner. The next time Brent says it, the new Pardner has to take 2 drinks, and then pick a new Pardner, and so on and so on. The Pardner must wear a special "Pardner" hat.

Rule #2: "Folks" Everyone drinks 1 when Brent says "Folks." However, if Brent says "Hold on Folks", everyone must drink once but the first person to drink has to finish their drink for not holding on.

Rule #3: "It's a foot race!". Whenever Brent says "It's a foot race" everyone has to finish their drink. The first one done becomes "That Man" and gets to punch the Pardner in the arm.

Rule #4: "There's that man again". After someone becomes "That Man," they get to give away 3 drinks to someone of their choosing the next time Brent says "That Man." That person then becomes "That Man." If Brent says "That Man" before "It's a footrace," The Pardner becomes That Man. If The Pardner becomes That Man first, he gets to punch the new That Man in the arm twice after giving away the 3 drinks. There must also be a special hat for "That Man."

Rule #5: "Dr. Pepper". Every time Brent says "Dr. Pepper" everyone has to yell out "I'M A PEPPER!" and take 2 drinks. Afterwards, each person must give out a satisfied "AAAAAAAHHHHH!", as if in a Dr. Pepper commercial. Anyone who fails to do so must drink again.

Rule #6: "Jack Arute". Whenever Brent says "Our ol' buddy Jack Arute" everyone has to say "AROOOOOOT!" Last one to do it has to do a shot. If everyone does it simultaneously, the Pardner must do a shot.

Rule #7: "In the college game". Whenever Brent says this little gem, everyone must say "Shut the **** up Brent", drink 2, and punch the Pardner in the arm.

Rule #8: Mentioning a Big 10 school during a Big 12 game. Whenever Brent does this, the first person who names the Big 10 school's mascot gets to make somebody drink for 11 seconds, since there's 11 schools in the Big 10.

Rule #9: Calling a touchdown before the player actually scores. For example, during an interception return, Brent says "It's a touchdown!" before the player actually scores. In this case, everyone must start drinking and continue to drink until the player actually does score. If by some odd event, the player does NOT score, everyone must finish their drink.

Rule #10: "Gary, my man". Whenever Brent says "Gary, my man", the Pardner gets to choose someone to be Gary. From that point on, that person must be referred to as "Gary, my man" until the game is over. "Gary, my man" gets to give away 5 drinks the rest of the game any time Brent says "Gary, my man". If someone talks to "Gary, my man" without calling him that, they have to do a shot. If there is someone playing the game actually named Gary, that person is automatically "Gary, my man".

Rule #11: "The Major". If Brent has a pet nickname for one of the players during the game, for example calling Major Applewhite "The Major", everyone must drink 5 anytime Brent uses this nickname. However, "Gary, my man" does not drink but gets to give away 5 drinks since this person already has a nickname of their own.

Rule #12: "John Saunders". The first time Brent quips with John Saunders, everyone must drink 1. The next time, everyone must drink 2, and so on and so on.

Rule #13: In the booth. Whenever there's a camera shot of Brent in the booth, the Pardner must make a toast to Brent. After the toast, everyone must drink 1.

Rule #14: "My Friend" Every Pardner gets to choose a "Friend." The friend must always get up to get the Pardner another drink (since the Pardner will be doing quite a bit of that). However, when Brent utters "My Friend" the friend gets to punch the Pardner in the arm for making him get up so much.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 12:32 AM
I hate the prevent defense. SC stopped them all game, and now starts using the prevent defense and ND is throwing all over them.

MWM
11-26-2006, 12:34 AM
Woah! Colerain got beat?!? Who beat them? :eek:


Davidson from the Columbus. they lost 10-6 and were held to two field goals. That's a HUGE upset. Colerain was ranked #12 in the nation and haven't had much problem with anyone this year.

paintmered
11-26-2006, 12:35 AM
Davidson from the Columbus. they lost 10-6 and were held to two field goals. That's a HUGE upset. Colerain was ranked #12 in the nation and haven't had much problem with anyone this year.

You aren't kidding about that being a HUGE upset. That's just.....wow.

I thought for sure once they handled St. X, they would waltz through the rest of the playoffs. I guess that's why they play 'em.

RBA
11-26-2006, 12:39 AM
Brady Quinn? Player of the Game? You got to be kidding me.

GAC
11-26-2006, 05:31 AM
I feel bad for Michigan. There's just no way you can keep USC out of the title game with their resume, but based on watching both teams several times this year, I think Michigan is better and would beat USC if they played. But that's the wonder of the BCS.

My sentiments too Mike.

Good article on ESPN....

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2676062

LOS ANGELES -- So, USC or Michigan?

That's the only real question left to answer in a season where a national championship matchup will be determined by -- and how stupid is this? -- "style" points.

I hate the BCS. I hate it because the two best teams in the country aren't going to play in the national title game. Instead, No. 1-ranked Ohio State is going to face a very good, but moderately flawed USC team.

If it were up to me -- and a slightly less-flawed Michigan team -- the BCS would be swimming with the fishes. It would be ruled unconstitutional. If you uttered its initials, you would be required to eat a very large bowl of FieldTurf.

So while the rest of the NCAA's Division I-AA, II and III qualifiers are in varying stages of 16-, 24- and 32-team football playoffs, we're stuck with BCS computer standings, mathematical formulas and a "system" so screwed up that it sees a therapist twice a week. It ought to be called the FAC (Flip A Coin).

That's what happened when the assorted (and occasional clueless) coaches and Harris Poll members sat down to fill out their top 25 ballots late Saturday evening and Sunday morning. They had to choose between 10-1 USC, which beat overrated Notre Dame, 44-24, Saturday night at the Coliseum, or 11-1 Michigan, which defeated the same Irish team by 26 points more than two months ago at South Bend.

The Trojans still have to beat UCLA at the Rose Bowl next Saturday, but if they do, the general consensus is that they'll be in Glendale, Ariz., for the Jan. 8 national championship. There are worse things that could happen, such as Florida somehow squirming its way into the title mix. And nobody outside the greater Gainesville area wants that, do they?

No, it's going to come down to USC or Michigan -- and splitting strands of hair.

Is USC's likely 11-1 regular season record better than Michigan's 11-1 mark?

Is USC's 20-point win against the Irish at home better than the Wolverines' 26-point win on the road?

Is USC's two-point loss at then-unranked Oregon State worse than Michigan's three-point loss at No. 1 Ohio State?

Is USC's schedule, which could include 10 bowl teams, more impressive than Michigan's schedule, which features seven bowl teams?

There are no right or wrong answers to any of these questions. That's the curse of the BCS. It takes subjectivity to a disturbing new level.

I think Michigan is the second-best team in the country. You might think USC is the team best equipped to play undefeated Ohio State. If you do, I've got no problem with your choice. The differences between the Trojans and the Wolverines are as thin as the drawstrings on the Bill Belichick-like sweatshirt Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis wore on the Coliseum sidelines.

Of course, you're not going to get much out of Weis when it comes to choosing between USC and Michigan. When I asked him if USC was the best team the Irish faced this season, Weis launched into a seemingly prepared script.

"It's too dangerous of territory for me to tread," he said, "so I'm going to avoid that one."

Weis' talking points were repeated by Notre Dame's players.

"I don't really care," said Irish safety Tom Zbikowski, when asked to choose between USC and Michigan. "I don't have an opinion."

And this from ND cornerback Mike Richardson: "I'm not really inclined to say anything about that."

Were the Irish under Weis' orders not to discuss any compare-and-contrast scenarios between the two teams?

A small pause. "We're not supposed to," said Richardson.

The Trojans weren't as shy. Wide receiver Dwayne Jarrett, who would have been a no-brainer Heisman finalist if he hadn't struggled with injuries earlier this season, said USC deserved a place in the championship game if it beat UCLA.

"Oh, yeah, definitely," said Jarrett, who was virtually uncoverable during a seven-catch, 132-yard, three-touchdown night. "We believe we're up there with the best of the best."

"I think that's the matchup everybody wants to see," said Trojans tailback Desmond Reed. "Big-time talent. Big-time matchups across the field. If I was a fan, I'd pay to see it."

Even USC coach Pete Carroll, who usually blows off all the BCS-scenario talk, was (for him) in campaign mode.

"We played a heckuva schedule," he said. "We'll play anybody anywhere, and I think we'll be hard to beat."

Actually, I think Ohio State will be hard to beat. If Oregon State can solve the Trojans, so can the Buckeyes. And if Ohio State can beat Michigan once, it can beat it twice, even on a neutral field.

Hey, here's a thought: wouldn't it be neat to see the Wolverines play the Trojans in, ta-da, an actual playoff game? You know, just like the rest of the NCAA? Then we wouldn't have to endure the Michigan-or-USC microanalysis.

To quote the wise Desmond Reed, I'd pay to see that.

RBA
11-26-2006, 09:07 AM
New predicton: USC by 28 over Ohio State. ;)

BuckWoody
11-26-2006, 11:10 AM
New predicton: USC by 28 over Ohio State. ;)
Deal, I'll take Ohio State and 28 points for one miiiiiillion dollars please. :D

Talking about rematches, what about the silliness of giving Notre Dame another shot at Michigan? They talked a lot about those two hooking up in the Rose Bowl later in the game. No way I want to see that game again. Michigan deserves better. If it works out that Ohio State and USC hook up in the title game, I want to see Michigan get BCS #4 (Florida, probably) in the Rose...and I want to see them win going away. Put Notre Dame in the Fiesta with Boise State if they have to be in any BCS bowl.

Slyder
11-26-2006, 11:46 AM
Deal, I'll take Ohio State and 28 points for one miiiiiillion dollars please. :D

Talking about rematches, what about the silliness of giving Notre Dame another shot at Michigan? They talked a lot about those two hooking up in the Rose Bowl later in the game. No way I want to see that game again. Michigan deserves better. If it works out that Ohio State and USC hook up in the title game, I want to see Michigan get BCS #4 (Florida, probably) in the Rose...and I want to see them win going away. Put Notre Dame in the Fiesta with Boise State if they have to be in any BCS bowl.

They will tie Notre Dame to Boise State to make that bowl a more interesting game. Knowing full well millions of people will watch just because of Notre Sham and prop up the non-BcS school. Cause we all know that ND isnt going to fall far enough to be taken out of BcS contention even though they are seriously overrated.

Chip R
11-26-2006, 11:49 AM
Deal, I'll take Ohio State and 28 points for one miiiiiillion dollars please. :D

Talking about rematches, what about the silliness of giving Notre Dame another shot at Michigan? They talked a lot about those two hooking up in the Rose Bowl later in the game. No way I want to see that game again. Michigan deserves better. If it works out that Ohio State and USC hook up in the title game, I want to see Michigan get BCS #4 (Florida, probably) in the Rose...and I want to see them win going away. Put Notre Dame in the Fiesta with Boise State if they have to be in any BCS bowl.


And there's another problem with the BCS. Michigan has to go to the Rose if they aren't #2 in the BCS. If USC is #2, then the Rose Bowl can invite anyone who qualified for a BCS game. Of course that hinges on who has first choice. If the Rose Bowl has first choice, you better believe they will take Notre Dame. So it's not about the best matchups. It's about the TV ratings and who has first choice.

max venable
11-26-2006, 01:35 PM
OSU will be favored in the BCS championship game...no matter who the opponent is.

You think USC was fast last night? Say hello to my little friends:
http://images.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/_photos/2005-08-25-in-ginn.jpg
http://www.nfldraftblitz.com/news/uploads/anthony_gonzalez_thumb.jpg
http://www.chroniclet.com/photos/091406osuwwe.jpg
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/22/229513.jpg
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/25/257068.jpg

RBA
11-26-2006, 01:55 PM
Revised prediction: USC by 32 points over OSU.

Spring~Fields
11-26-2006, 03:02 PM
OSU will be favored in the BCS championship game...no matter who the opponent is.

You think USC was fast last night? Say hello to my little friends:
http://images.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/_photos/2005-08-25-in-ginn.jpg
http://www.nfldraftblitz.com/news/uploads/anthony_gonzalez_thumb.jpg
http://www.chroniclet.com/photos/091406osuwwe.jpg
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/22/229513.jpg
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/25/257068.jpg

Speaks for the Ohio State offense.
Question is can the Ohio State defense do a better job against USC and the USC offense, that same Ohio State defense that did not do well against the Michigan offense? Don't forget that Pete and his staff at USC know something about coaching too.

Ohio State and Michigan defenses looked good against the weak sisters in their schedules, but it was not good enough when it came to the Michigan or Ohio State offense, I don't think the Ohio State defense will be against Pete and his offense either. USC might be up two touchdowns on OSU real quick like they were against ND. :)

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 03:16 PM
Guys, USC isn't in the National Championship game just yet. We still have to at crosstown rival UCLA. SC should crush UCLA, but you know how those rivalry games go...

BuckeyeRed27
11-26-2006, 03:24 PM
Ohio State's defense gave up 17 points on short fields. USC will score but not enough.

BTW two of the people pictured are OSU defensive players.

MWM
11-26-2006, 04:13 PM
OBM, I forbid you from using the term "We" for USC. :evil:

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 04:47 PM
OBM, I forbid you from using the term "We" for USC. :evil:

Why?

Pet peeve?

Spring~Fields
11-26-2006, 05:47 PM
BTW two of the people pictured are OSU defensive players.
That is correct. I hope that you are right that USC won't score enough. I was thinking that Ohio State won't score enough.

dman
11-26-2006, 05:47 PM
Don't forget that Pete and his staff at USC know something about coaching too.

Pete Carroll, like Charlie Weiss, knows about coaching, but they get by because they whine and cry to the refs to get calls to go their way. Must be something about being former NFL coaches.

OnBaseMachine
11-26-2006, 05:55 PM
Pete Carroll, like Charlie Weiss, knows about coaching, but they get by because they whine and cry to the refs to get calls to go their way. Must be something about being former NFL coaches.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Riiiggggggght.

See why folks don't like Ohio State?

dman
11-26-2006, 06:40 PM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Riiiggggggght.

See why folks don't like Ohio State?

I don't really care one way or the other dude. Personally, living in Columbus, you get tired of hearing the OSU Football gong beat on so much. By the time the OSU/UM game comes around, I'm just thankful the season is coming to an end personally. This year however, I don't think there's any doubting that the Bucks are the best NCAA taem in the country, and I think that is why some folks don't like OSU. Nothing less than envy because of how well they've played this tear.

But, I won't back down from that Pete Carroll/Charlie Weiss statement.

RBA
11-26-2006, 06:47 PM
Oh darn. I forgot the refs were on USC/Pete Carroll's side. I need to revise my prediction. USC by 38 over OSU. ;)

Jpup
11-26-2006, 07:13 PM
I still think Michigan is the 2nd best team in the country. On a neutral field, who knows?