detlef Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Let me preface by saying that I am absolutely in favor of a playoff, even if only 4 teams so this could truly be settled on the field. The BCS came about because we were tired of voting on the best team. I'm not sure exactly how voting to see who gets to play in the final is significantly better. That said, the debate before us has to be based on the current system and who deserves a shot based on that system. Reason #1: Those who defend the BCS explain that big games down the stretch in the regular season are the defacto quarterfinal and semi-final rounds. Well, if that's the case, the Michigan/OSU game in November was a semi-final matchup and Michigan lost. Why should the loser of a semi-final match-up get to go to the final? Reason #2: There is insufficient data that supports that OSU and Mich are the two best teams in the country. They, in fact, may be. Both have certainly looked impressive all year and OSU based on the fact that they've managed to go undefeated playing in a major conference have rightfully punched their ticket. That said, until the bowls are played and we see how good the second tier of the Big-10 is vs the second tier of the SEC is, we have no idea whether these two teams are truly great or were simply getting fat against mediocre teams. The only school that truly proved themselves outside of their conference, failed to do so within their conference (USC). That can't be said about anyone else. Thus, the dominance of OSU and Mich was defined essentially in a vaccum. As I have said before, it would be essentially the same as everyone simply deciding that the Yankees and the Red Sox were the two best teams in baseball and should therefore not only meet in the ALCS but go ahead and have a rematch in the WS simply because they both won 110 games and nobody in the NL managed better than 100. How do we know that each and every other team in the AL wasn't garbage and that either the Yankees or Sox would be lucky to win 90 if they played in the NL. There just is no way to tell. You are not punishing the loser of that series by not allowing them a rematch, you're simply approaching the situation scientfically and academically. What is known: OSU beat Mich head to head. What is unknown: Who is better between Mich and FL. How can you rationally decide given this that the best way to determine the best team in the country is to retry the known sample and ignore the unknown? Reason #3: This is more opinion than anything but I think it holds water. Who you beat is more important than who you lose to (assuming the loss is to an upper tier team). On any given day, any top 10ish team should be able to beat another, so saying that losing to OSU is more impressive than losing to Auburn doesn't do much for me. I think it is more significant to look at their best wins and who those teams also beat. Michigan's were against Notre Dame and Wisconson, neither of whom has a win against a team that finished in the top 25 of the BCS. Florida's were against LSU (who beat #12 Ark and #17 Tenn), Ark (who beat #8 Auburn and #17 Tenn), and Tenn (who beat #18 Cal). That batch of wins seems a whole lot more impressive to me. Reason #4: You can say all you want about the voters putting FL #2 because they didn't want to see Michigan/OSU, but what about the computers? The two teams finished in a dead heat. I'd have to assume that the program they use is consistant. Reason #5: This has more to do with why Michigan should not be complaining that they didn't get in more than why FL in particular should be there because they're essentially guilty of the same thing. If you want the benefit of the doubt, do like USC does and schedule better. If you play a three game season, you better win 'em all or you're left hoping for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Few other reasons why the Gators might have been selected. Florida has been ranked in the AP top 10 all season while Michigan hasn't. Gators were ranked ahead of Michigan up to week 8. Gators only loss at Auburn involved a very questionable call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Everyone can put a testimony to their rationalization of this point, but the bottem line is Florida made it to the championship game for one reason ONLY. The voters didn't want to see a match up of #1 OSU and #2 Michigan. Countless voters have made this point while backpeddling to some of the statements you speak of in your post. Any other logic is self justification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Few other reasons why the Gators might have been selected. Florida has been ranked in the AP top 10 all season while Michigan hasn't. Gators were ranked ahead of Michigan up to week 8. Gators only loss at Auburn involved a very questionable call. Forgot one more reason. Florida has a better record than Michigan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 4, 2006 Author Share Posted December 4, 2006 Everyone can put a testimony to their rationalization of this point, but the bottem line is Florida made it to the championship game for one reason ONLY. The voters didn't want to see a match up of #1 OSU and #2 Michigan. Countless voters have made this point while backpeddling to some of the statements you speak of in your post. Any other logic is self justification. As I said above, not wanting to see OSU and Mich play again is actually a completely valid argument since there is not enough data to support the fact that they are, in fact, the two best teams. If Michigan had separated themselves from everyone else by proving themselves against a better schedule, then I'd have no problem with the rematch. Fact is, they didn't. In that case, I think the tie should go to the team that hasn't already had a crack and failed to win against OSU. I am not saying that Flordia is certainly better than Michigan. I'm simply saying that there is no tangible evidence that Michigan is certainly better than Florida. Thus, in light of that uncertainty, Florida deserves one shot more than Mich deserves two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Everyone can put a testimony to their rationalization of this point, but the bottem line is Florida made it to the championship game for one reason ONLY. The voters didn't want to see a match up of #1 OSU and #2 Michigan. This is correct. There is no other way to explain #4 leapfrogging #2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 This is correct. There is no other way to explain #4 leapfrogging #2. Yep--if it had been the middle of the season when FLA beat ARK, FLA would not have jumped over a #2 UM just because UM was on its bye-week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Yep--if it had been the middle of the season when FLA beat ARK, FLA would not have jumped over a #2 UM just because UM was on its bye-week. Wiegie good opinion or guess. Is that all you got? Give me something concrete versa what you think would happen. If I recall LSU jumped 4 spots in the polls with their win over the Hogs. Now that is concrete and should disprove your opinion on what might have happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Wiegie good opinion or guess. Is that all you got? Give me something concrete versa what you think would happen. If I recall LSU jumped 4 spots in the polls with their win over the Hogs. Now that is concrete and should disprove your opinion on what might have happen. OK, so how exactly did LSU jump up from being ranked #8 in week 13 to being ranked #5 in week 14? Arkansas--not on a bye and lost Notre Dame--not on a bye and lost West Virginia--not on a bye and lost So your "concrete" example neither proves nor disproves anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 OK, so how exactly did LSU jump up from being ranked #8 in week 13 to being ranked #5 in week 14? Arkansas--not on a bye and lost Notre Dame--not on a bye and lost West Virginia--not on a bye and lost So your "concrete" example neither proves nor disproves anything. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 BTW, you can look at all of those ranked wins all you want... SOS has Florida and Michigan in a statistical dead heat. So the answer is, Florida played a SLIGHTLY tougher schedule according to the raw numbers. In other words, you're splitting hairs. To me it's simple... Florida won there conference, Michigan didn't. Michigan is the 2nd best team, and gets a chance to prove it in the Rose Bowl, while Ohio State will prove they are #1 by waxing the third best team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 BTW, you can look at all of those ranked wins all you want... SOS has Florida and Michigan in a statistical dead heat. So the answer is, Florida played a SLIGHTLY tougher schedule according to the raw numbers. In other words, you're splitting hairs. To me it's simple... Florida won there conference, Michigan didn't. Michigan is the 2nd best team, and gets a chance to prove it in the Rose Bowl, while Ohio State will prove they are #1 by waxing the third best team. yep, I concur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 4, 2006 Author Share Posted December 4, 2006 BTW, you can look at all of those ranked wins all you want... SOS has Florida and Michigan in a statistical dead heat. So the answer is, Florida played a SLIGHTLY tougher schedule according to the raw numbers. In other words, you're splitting hairs. To me it's simple... Florida won there conference, Michigan didn't. Michigan is the 2nd best team, and gets a chance to prove it in the Rose Bowl, while Ohio State will prove they are #1 by waxing the third best team. Thank you for making my point. The thing is, if it is a statistical dead heat. If we are, in fact, splitting hairs, as you say, then the nod should go to Florida. At no point have I said that Florida is absolutely better than Michigan and that's why they should get a shot. All I've said is that, since no tangible evidence can be given that Michigan is certainly better than Florida, they should not be given back to back chances to beat OSU at the expense of anybody getting one. If OSU plays Michigan and wins, all they've done is prove without a doubt that they're better than Michigan. We will still have no idea if they're the best team in the country. If OSU plays Michigan and loses, we've proven even less than that. Why are people so opposed to actually trying to determine the best team on the field? If OSU waxes FL, then pretty much nobody can whine (save Louisville and Boise St, I suppose). Michigan can't because they had their chance and lost. Florida can't either because they'll have had their chance as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 (edited) OK, so how exactly did LSU jump up from being ranked #8 in week 13 to being ranked #5 in week 14? Arkansas--not on a bye and lost Notre Dame--not on a bye and lost West Virginia--not on a bye and lost So your "concrete" example neither proves nor disproves anything. Might be wrong, but wasn't Wisconsin ahead of LSU in the BCS that week as well? Check it out and get back with me. Edited December 4, 2006 by Rockerbraves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I think what Michigan fans are mostly pi$$ed about is, here you got a whiny coach down in Florida who was crying all last week, and florida wins their game, and USC loses. Florida would not have passed Michigan if USC had won. They voted against a rematch, not for Florida, and that's what bothers Michigan fans the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 4, 2006 Author Share Posted December 4, 2006 I think what Michigan fans are mostly pi$$ed about is, here you got a whiny coach down in Florida who was crying all last week, and florida wins their game, and USC loses. Florida would not have passed Michigan if USC had won. They voted against a rematch, not for Florida, and that's what bothers Michigan fans the most. I can see why that would piss them off. Frankly, part of why I had no problem with it is that I personally had them ranked USC, FL, Mich going into the weekend. USC because they were the only team to prove it out of conference, FL because neither they or Mich did much out of conference but it was my opinion (shared by many BTW) that the SEC was the harder conference so felt they'd "proved it more". Thus, I have no issue. Because the BCS sucks, somebody will get screwed. The lesser of the two evils, however, is undoubtedly Michigan not getting back to back chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I think what Michigan fans are mostly pi$$ed about is, here you got a whiny coach down in Florida who was crying all last week, and florida wins their game, and USC loses. Florida would not have passed Michigan if USC had won. They voted against a rematch, not for Florida, and that's what bothers Michigan fans the most. I think you're right - FL would've likely stayed behind MICH if USC had won. But someone said FLA's only loss was to Auburn with a questionable call, and he was right too. OSU beat Michigan fair and square, and it wasn't really as close as the final score indicated. Troy Smith just dominates the Wolverines and would likely do it again in January. IMHO. Maybe the voters are saying 'Hey Michigan, beat OSU in the regular season more than 1 in 5 tries, regardless of which field you play on, and maybe you'll get in.' Seems reasonable to me. No excuses.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 OSU beat Michigan fair and square, and it wasn't really as close as the final score indicated. The game was every bit as close as the score indicated. Without one stupid penalty in the last 5 minutes, there's a very good chance that Michigan wins that game as OSU was going to have to punt that drive but scored a TD. Now, I'll give you that OSU dominated the first half, but how can people say the game wasn't close when UM was a knucklehead's late hit away from winning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 The game was every bit as close as the score indicated. Without one stupid penalty in the last 5 minutes, there's a very good chance that Michigan wins that game as OSU was going to have to punt that drive but scored a TD. Now, I'll give you that OSU dominated the first half, but how can people say the game wasn't close when UM was a knucklehead's late hit away from winning I'll just say that I never doubted that, if Michigan somehow took the lead, Tressel & Smith would find a way to beat them in the end. Hey OSU fans - did you ever feel really threatened? Doubt it... Smith just does that to that team, period - plays the best game of the year every time. I think he really enjoys beating them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Michigan shot themselves in the foot when they dove head first on troy smith while he was clearly going out of bounds. One dumb play basically ruined it for Michigan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 And if you took a poll from Buck fans, who would be an easier opponent, I'm guessing Florida would win that poll in a landslide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 And if you took a poll from Buck fans, who would be an easier opponent, I'm guessing Florida would win that poll in a landslide. Would think no team likes to play against a team they have already beaten. Take this poll from Buck fans, would they Ohio State fans accept Michigan as the better football team and NC if Michigan would have beat them by 3 points, I'm guessing the answer would be no by a landside. And rightfully so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Would think no team likes to play against a team they have already beaten. Take this poll from Buck fans, would they Ohio State fans accept Michigan as the better football team and NC if Michigan would have beat them by 3 points, I'm guessing the answer would be no by a landside. And rightfully so. Very true. Very very true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonkis Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I'll just say that I never doubted that, if Michigan somehow took the lead, Tressel & Smith would find a way to beat them in the end. Hey OSU fans - did you ever feel really threatened? Doubt it... Smith just does that to that team, period - plays the best game of the year every time. I think he really enjoys beating them... Both sides of the OSU/Mich fan base ALWAYS feel threatened, regardless of the current ranking, talent base, etc. That's why the rivalry is so much fun for the fans. Isn't it the same for USC/UCLA, 'cause there was a significant ranking disparity in that game, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 (edited) Might be wrong, but wasn't Wisconsin ahead of LSU in the BCS that week as well? Check it out and get back with me. here you go: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsinde...seasonYear=2006 And even if we are talking about Wisconsin getting jumped in the BCS standings and not the polls, your argument as to why my comment was wrong still doesn't hold water because Wisconsin was not on a middle of the season bye. Their season had ended when LSU made the jump. Edited December 4, 2006 by wiegie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.