Who Deserves to to play O$U for the NC?

[GoshenGipper]

Ok, the SEC Championship is all but over, so in your opinion who deserves to play against O$U in the BCS Championship game and why?

 

[GoshenGipper]

I'm going with Florida because they won the SEC conference, and I think Michigan already had their shot. If UM had lost to O$U earlier in the season it might be different, but when it's the last game that each team played I think it's to soon for a rematch.

 

[notdam4]

I'm going with Florida because they won the SEC conference, and I think Michigan already had their shot. If UM had lost to O$U earlier in the season it might be different, but when it's the last game that each team played I think it's to soon for a rematch.

Agreed.. I would much rather see Florida play OSU. I think it would be a great game.

 

[goldenechoes]

no one

 

[KOWPOKE]

UM had to play at The Shoe - Huge disadvantage for a title shot.

 

[nayers]

why should UM get two shots at the buckeyes before UF gets one...doesnt make sense, we need a playoff

 

[tedwick]

why should UM get two shots at the buckeyes before UF gets one...doesnt make sense, we need a playoff

Because UM is a better team than UF. I'm not sure about how I feel about a rematch, but if you want the two best teams in the nation playing, the national championship game will be a rematch. I will defend this with two words: rotating quarterbacks. nuff said.

 

[guff]

why should UM get two shots at the buckeyes before UF gets one...doesnt make sense, we need a playoff

Because this is D1 college football and D1 football has the worst postseason of any sport.

9th girls basketball leagues have more legimate post seasons than D1 football. Two teams play a meaningful game; everyone else plays multi-million dollar scrimmages. And the real kick in the ass is that computer geeks will the deciding factors. Guys who wouldn't know what a football was if rammed one up their a$$es are going to determine who gets to play for the national title.

Blessed are the geeks for they shall determine the outcome of college football.

 

[guff]

I will defend this with two words: rotating quarterbacks. nuff said.

Not quite enough - rotating quarterbacks and one of them can only run left.

 

[dudexcore]

i don't like michigan, but i'd rather have another big ten team playing for the NC over florida. i fucking hate florida.

 

[NDOM]

Florida deserves to be #2 over Michigan. Harder schedual and better style points. Michigans schedual was not really that tough and they already had their chances with Ohio State. Ohio State vs. Florida in the National Championship.

 

[irishfan]

If only Boise State played a tougher non-conference schedule then maybe they would be included in this. I wouldnt want to play them on that Blue Turf.

 

[Famboo28]

For as much as I hate the SEC, you have to go with Florida on this one.

 

[guff]

Florida deserves to be #2 over Michigan. Harder schedual and better style points. Michigans schedual was not really that tough and they already had their chances with Ohio State. Ohio State vs. Florida in the National Championship.

And this is what big time college football has been reduced to - style points. Frickin' style points. WTF are "style points"? Did Chris Leak rip the entry on triple inverted flip from the 10m platform? Did Mike Hart goof up on the floor exercise? It's a football game - you win or lose. That's it there are no style points.

 

[tedwick]

And the real kick in the ass is that computer geeks will the deciding factors. Guys who wouldn't know what a football was if rammed one up their a$$es are going to determine who gets to play for the national title.

Blessed are the geeks for they shall determine the outcome of college football.

Normally, i'm pretty good natured. However, you're a moron for thinking that the guys that put together the college football rankings know nothing about football. One of them probably knows more than 3 of us combined about football, not even comparing them to the drivel that is network college FB commentary. Their rankings are better, and more logically founded, than most coaches' ballots. I'd much rather have Jeff Sagarin's formula determine the national championship matchup rather than Steve Spurrier, Lee Corso, or ANY of the conference-nominated cronies on the Harris poll.

/rant

 

[VictorsValiant]

You have to hate Urban Meyer for his persistant lobbying efforts that will backfire in the end. He's turned this debate from Florida to the general superiority of the SEC. Now, if you're a coach from the ACC, Big Ten, Big East, Big 12 and Pac Ten, do you want to hear any of that? Florida should be eliminated from considered because of that.

The SEC is not better than other conferences. They have a poor record in bowl games against other BCS schools. Their defenses are good but no team except maybe Tennessee (who lost Ainge) has a conventional, efficient offense (such as the one employed by Charlie Weis). They simply can't score, and the bowl games prove that. Therefore, the belief that Florida plays in a tougher conference is unfounded, and is largely a myth propogated by neanderthalic fans who view football as the only means to their legitimacy, since their school are illegitimate academically.

Florida played Southern Miss, UCF and DII Western Carolina for the non-conference.
Michigan played Notre Dame (a decent, ranked team) on the road. We also played MAC champion Central Michigan. Florida nearly lost to Vanderbilt. We beat them by 20.

Florida nearly lost to South Carolina, Georgia, Tennesee and Florida State. They lost by 10 to a team ranked at least 10 spots below OSU.
Michigan nearly lost to Ball State. We lost to #1 OSU by three points on the road.

Losing close does matter. It means you aren't a good team. It means you get by. Notice Michigan has far more 14+ point victories that are decisive. None of our games were really close, while Florida had several nailbiters.

So if you want to match the 2 best team, it should be a rematch. Yes, a playoff would be demonstrably better, and maybe they can change the rules, which would be awesome. But stop pretending Florida's better, because actually, they are demonstrably worse.

And if they do play OSU, OSU will KILL them.

 

[Óglaigh_na_hÉireann]

I voted Florida just because their one loss came off of a bad call during the Auburn game.

Regardless, I think Michigan's the better team. But the problem is, these teams JUST played and Michigan LOST. It's unfair for OSU to have to play them yet again. And if it did happen and OSU lost, they could just use the argument that the bowl system is flawed: bowls are isolated from the actual season by time.... a goddamn month's-worth of time. It would affect both teams, but the loser always earns the argument point.

Other than that, no one wants to see this game except Michigan fans. Here in Columbus, no one wants it. Around the country, no one wants it. It's completely uninteresting to non-Michigan fans.

 

[GoshenGipper]

I think Michigan is better than Florida and they would probably beat them on a neutral field, but Michigan had their shot at O$U in the last game of the season, and they didn't win. It's time for someone else to have a chance and Florida is that team. After the blowouts of Oklahoma and Nebraska I think you hould have to win your conference to play in the BCS Championship game and Michigan didn't.

 

[lattedatte]

You have to hate Urban Meyer for his persistant lobbying efforts that will backfire in the end. He's turned this debate from Florida to the general superiority of the SEC. Now, if you're a coach from the ACC, Big Ten, Big East, Big 12 and Pac Ten, do you want to hear any of that? Florida should be eliminated from considered because of that.

The SEC is not better than other conferences. They have a poor record in bowl games against other BCS schools. Their defenses are good but no team except maybe Tennessee (who lost Ainge) has a conventional, efficient offense (such as the one employed by Charlie Weis). They simply can't score, and the bowl games prove that. Therefore, the belief that Florida plays in a tougher conference is unfounded, and is largely a myth propogated by neanderthalic fans who view football as the only means to their legitimacy, since their school are illegitimate academically.

Florida played Southern Miss, UCF and DII Western Carolina for the non-conference.
Michigan played Notre Dame (a decent, ranked team) on the road. We also played MAC champion Central Michigan. Florida nearly lost to Vanderbilt. We beat them by 20.

Florida nearly lost to South Carolina, Georgia, Tennesee and Florida State. They lost by 10 to a team ranked at least 10 spots below OSU.
Michigan nearly lost to Ball State. We lost to #1 OSU by three points on the road.

Losing close does matter. It means you aren't a good team. It means you get by. Notice Michigan has far more 14+ point victories that are decisive. None of our games were really close, while Florida had several nailbiters.

So if you want to match the 2 best team, it should be a rematch. Yes, a playoff would be demonstrably better, and maybe they can change the rules, which would be awesome. But stop pretending Florida's better, because actually, they are demonstrably worse.

And if they do play OSU, OSU will KILL them.

I agree with you and I would agree with a guy from Florida that used the excuse that they played 5 ranked teams and beat 4 of em. both teams deserve it or do not deserve it, it is splitting hairs... we need a playoff..

 

[VictorsValiant]

I would not have a problem with a spilit national title if we beat OSU in Glendale if it happens.
That would be a compromise. What shouldn't be compromised is the principle that the two teams playing the BCS championsihip game should be the two BEST teams.

I thought Florida was better, but after looking closely at their schedule, I am unimpressed.

I wonder why OSU doesn't want to play us. If Florida's the better team, shouldn't they want to play a team (Michigan), that's worse. It seems like some Buckeyes are scared.

 

[tedwick]

The "Win your conference" thing is kind of lame, in my opinion. The two best teams in college football should play for the championship. The whole point of the BCS was #1 vs. #2. Say a team goes undefeated the entire season, then loses in the conference championship game. They could still very well be the #2 team in the nation and if this rule were in place, you wouldn't have the top 2 teams in the nation on the field, and that would be a failure taking into account the goals of the BCS. Not only that, but it would be a sham championship because the top 2 teams weren't playing.

Take Michigan out of the picture for a second. Say Florida had beaten LSU. They're undefeated coming into today. They then lose to Arkansas. Who would you suggest plays OSU in the championship game? A USC team that lost to Oregon State and UCLA? An hypothetically 3-loss LSU team? Louisville? Wisconsin? Boise State? No. You put the 1-loss Florida team in the championship game, even though they didn't win the SEC.

Now, this year is a little complicated as #1 vs. one of the debated #2's would be a rematch. I think Michigan will be punished for not beating OSU, perhaps unjustly. I think there's a legitimate debate over which team is #2, but I don't think that Michigan losing to OSU should hurt Michigan any in that debate. Whether the goals of the BCS are legitimate is also debatable, but as it stands, the #1 and #2 teams play in glendale. For any other bowl, rematches can be taken into account. But not for the title game. It's #1 vs. #2. It possibly being a rematch should not be taken into account when determining the matchup.

 

[scooper]

You have to hate Urban Meyer for his persistant lobbying efforts that will backfire in the end. He's turned this debate from Florida to the general superiority of the SEC. Now, if you're a coach from the ACC, Big Ten, Big East, Big 12 and Pac Ten, do you want to hear any of that? Florida should be eliminated from considered because of that.

The SEC is not better than other conferences. They have a poor record in bowl games against other BCS schools. Their defenses are good but no team except maybe Tennessee (who lost Ainge) has a conventional, efficient offense (such as the one employed by Charlie Weis). They simply can't score, and the bowl games prove that. Therefore, the belief that Florida plays in a tougher conference is unfounded, and is largely a myth propogated by neanderthalic fans who view football as the only means to their legitimacy, since their school are illegitimate academically.

Florida played Southern Miss, UCF and DII Western Carolina for the non-conference.
Michigan played Notre Dame (a decent, ranked team) on the road. We also played MAC champion Central Michigan. Florida nearly lost to Vanderbilt. We beat them by 20.

Florida nearly lost to South Carolina, Georgia, Tennesee and Florida State. They lost by 10 to a team ranked at least 10 spots below OSU.
Michigan nearly lost to Ball State. We lost to #1 OSU by three points on the road.

Losing close does matter. It means you aren't a good team. It means you get by. Notice Michigan has far more 14+ point victories that are decisive. None of our games were really close, while Florida had several nailbiters.

So if you want to match the 2 best team, it should be a rematch. Yes, a playoff would be demonstrably better, and maybe they can change the rules, which would be awesome. But stop pretending Florida's better, because actually, they are demonstrably worse.

And if they do play OSU, OSU will KILL them.

%@%$@*#@(!!!!!!! VICTORS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I agree with you entire post. Now I have to go cleanse myself.

If Florida gets in, it will be a bloodbath. That team can't hang with OSU.

 

[bc525]

The argument that Michigan had it's chance is bogus....don't get me wrong...I hate them both (hell all three of them for that matter), but the national championship is about the 2 best teams in the country battling it out.....that means Michigan vs. OSU....if anyone thinks Florida could beat either of those 2 teams they're drinking the funny kool-aid....

Kudos to UCLA for proving USC is beatable and NOT worthy of playing in the big game......

Break it down...regular season is regular season....at the end it's about the 2 best teams.....regardless of what's happened in the regular season.....yes, you have to take into account the regular season, but at some point that is that and you have to put it behind you....in other words...rank the teams on the regular season based on just that the regular season....after that you have to forget it and look at the rankings...do that and you get UM vs. OSU....no way around it.....heck I'd much rather see 2 Big 10 teams in it anyway!

I say to hell with them all GO IRISH!

 

[penguin]

I still choose Michigan for a re-match. In a play-off situation it's possible those two teams would meet again, anyway. The last meeting was a good game to watch. That's part of what attracts sponsors, a good match-up.
I think Oklahoma is a better team than Florida. I've been wondering all day, how it would be for us to play Oklahoma ? They also have 2 losses. If Florida plays OSU, then who does ND play ? A re-match vs USC ? A re-match vs Michigan ? Is everyone just against re-matches on principle ?
Who would play LSU at the Rose Bowl ? Wisconsin ?
Tomorrow should be very interesting.

 

[nbogan1]

i say florida, they won their conference, it would not be fair to ohio state to have to beat michigan twice when michigan would only have to beat ohio state once

 

[penguin]

I agree totally with bc525 aka "Genius"

 

[nbogan1]

I agree UM is the second best team, but if michigan were to win the nat'l championship game it would be unfar to OSU because they already beat UM

 

[GoshenGipper]

The "Win your conference" thing is kind of lame, in my opinion. The two best teams in college football should play for the championship. The whole point of the BCS was #1 vs. #2. Say a team goes undefeated the entire season, then loses in the conference championship game. They could still very well be the #2 team in the nation and if this rule were in place, you wouldn't have the top 2 teams in the nation on the field, and that would be a failure taking into account the goals of the BCS. Not only that, but it would be a sham championship because the top 2 teams weren't playing.

That did happen, remember Oklahoma in '03? Oklahoma was #1 all year and then they lost to Kansas St. in the Big12 Championship game. Well, that left USC, LSU, and OU all with 1 loss, and even though USC moved up to #1 in both polls after OU's loss they were still left out of the '04 Sugar Bowl. LSU then killed OU and and USC destroyed whoever they played in the Rose Bowl and we had another split NC. USC won the AP, and LSU was te default coaches choice because of the BCS rules.

 

[guff]

This little blurb is clipped from Czabe.com - the home Steve Czabe Fox Sports Radio morning sports guy - it's a good show funny, good info, good interviews etc.

I interviewed one of the uber-nerds whose rankings help determine the National Championship game in college football. Wes Colley doesn’t just have a computer ranking, no he has a “matrix.” (Ooooohhhhhh!)

While a nice fella, and whip smart (he’s a PHD in Astro Physics), he admitted that he doesn’t really know much about the teams he ranks. When I asked him how could he have Rutgers over Ohio State, it was all about the number of losses by opponents.

When I asked him how many players on Rutgers he could name, he said: “Um… Rice.” And that was it. When it came to Ohio State, he said: “Troy Smith…. And their coach, Tressel.”

Wonderful.

And some people think the system is “fine.” Har.

On a side note, Colley said in college, he and some nerd buddies tried to create a matrix to determine “the best person of all time in the world.”

Wow. Ambitious. And hardly number friendly. He said it came down to Jesus Christ and Shakespeare. Must’ve been a helluva battle.

>>>>>>>>>

Some people jerk off Colley makes matrixes - Hooray for him! Colley like the others Billingsley, A&H, Massey, Wolfe and Sagrin know numbers. But they can't determine champs only competition can do that.

How does the NFL determine the participants in the Super Bowl? On the field.
How does MLB determine the participants in the World Series? On the field.
How does college football NAIA through D1AA determine the participants in their title games? On the field.
How does every other competitive event determine the participants in the championship event? By playing the game.

How does D1 college football do it?
1. Coaches that don't have enough to time to make an accurate assessment of each team ranks those teams.
2. 114 people most of them known only to their wives and mothers and whose qualifications and impartiality for such a task are questionable rank the teams (List).
3. 6 computer geeks use their own special formula to rank the teams.

Enter Professor Frink and the Gambletron 2000 who spins it all around and gets... OSU vs. SMU - - flarvin, um wah, glaven.

 

[tedwick]

That did happen, remember Oklahoma in '03? Oklahoma was #1 all year and then they lost to Kansas St. in the Big12 Championship game. Well, that left USC, LSU, and OU all with 1 loss, and even though USC moved up to #1 in both polls after OU's loss they were still left out of the '04 Sugar Bowl. LSU then killed OU and and USC destroyed whoever they played in the Rose Bowl and we had another split NC. USC won the AP, and LSU was te default coaches choice because of the BCS rules.

OK. So that meant that the method of determining #1 and #2 failed there. Doesn't say anything about being a conference champion or not. That example has to do with the the strength of that particular Oklahoma team, along with LSU and USC. However, we can't extrapolate that particular example to provide a basis of determining champions for all situations.

The BCS is trying to put #1 and #2 together at the end of the year. This involves deciding who is #1 and who is #2, which is often complicated. When you make a decision about something, you want to have the most data to make the decision as possible, hence the complex BCS formula. The thing is, being a conference champ in some of these conferences hinges on ONE GAME. So, should a loss in that one game be the ONLY piece of data you consider in whether a team is #2 or not, rather than the entire set of BCS data? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to do things that way. The team will most likely be punished for losing, but if the BCS ranking, the accepted evaluator for the championship game, says that the team is still #2, then they ought to be playing for the championship.

edit: and guff. how many guys on rutgers can you name? like the good professor, i can name one, ray rice. they're cinderellas. they're the media darlings as a collective, not as individuals. how many guys can you name on George Mason's final four squad last year? same thing.