Florida in BCS

"You don't get redos on neutral fields in somewhat close games."

I am not saying that UM should be in the title game because they should get a "redo" - I'm saying they should be in title game because they are a better team than UF. THAT is what this game should be about - not about giving other teams a "chance" to win a national championship.

I'm also saying if you really are for giving everyone an "equal" shot than let's really make it equal. Let's give UF the same situation as UM. If it's obvious, as it should be, that playing OSU on a neutral field will not be the same as UM playing in Columbus than we should really be using some other criterion (such as maybe - WHO IS THE BETTER TEAM!) than "UM has already lost to OSU".

FEAR ALBERT THE ALIGATOR!

what\'s preventing boise state and someone else scrimmaging on jan 8 in boise ? maybe too cold, o.k., how about in l.a. make a plan, and do it.

Losing by 10 points is now considered being manhandled? Even so, better to be "manhandled" by the number 1 team in the country than by the number 10 team in the country. You, sir, are an idiot.

"Let's have UF play AU on a neutral field too."

I have no problem with UF playing AU in a bowl game. Let's set it up!

Once again, it's not about who the two teams have lost to as much as is it about who they beat. UF beat better teams and haven't been beaten on the field by OSU yet.

Boise State is the only team that deserves to play Ohio State. Difficulty of schedule means nothing to me. Anyone with one loss should NEVER play for a National Championship. The entire season is one big tournament, if you lose you should go home. Michigan and Florida each lost. SORRY, better luck again next year. The problem arises when you have more than 2 teams that end the season undefeated. There appears to be no problem this year. 2 undefeated teams, let them play.

We don't necessarily know that Florida beat better teams. It is the popular thing to say, because everyone (especially those living in the South) thinks that the SEC is the best conference in football. We don't really have anyway of figuring that out because they refuse to play anyone who is halfway decent outside of their conference.

You will try to argue that Tennessee killed Cal. Well, I can counter that by using your idiotic argument from the other thread that "it was the first game of the season, and Cal was playing in a place they have never been to, against a team they have never played before." Funny how that works both ways, huh?

But I give Arkansas credit for scheduling USC out of conference the past 2 years. Worked out well for them, huh? And they are what? The second best team in the SEC? Nice conference, buddy.

Mtn Dew wrote:

Once again, it's not about who the two teams have lost to as much as is it about who they beat. UF beat better teams and haven't been beaten on the field by OSU yet.

ok - Auburn beat UF - so they should get a chance to be in the title game before UF does - right?

I mean - Auburn beat Florida - Florida is better than anybody that Florida beat, so Auburn had a better season. Sure Auburn lost twice, but we should ignore that because, according to you, the only thing that matters is the quality of wins.

Boise State answers all of those questions.

You can say that the Cal game was not a realistic representation of how good Cal was, but they still lost. It might have been closer on a neutral field later in the year but I've seen nothing from Cal since then to make me think that Cal would beat UT if given a second shot.

The SEC has played many good out of conference teams in the past, now and in the future. Auburn has played a home and home series with USC as well as Ga Tech. Alabama played Oklahoma a few years ago when they were at the top and will play FSU next year. Arkansas played USC 2 years in a row and I believe played Texas out of conference too. Florida plays FSU every year. UGa plays Ga Tech every year. Mississippi State played West Virginia this year. Tennessee played Cal. Vanderbilt went to Michigan this year.

Just this year the SEC played these teams out of conference:

Arkansas played USC (and got clobbered)

Tennessee played Cal (and clobbered them)

Auburn played WSU (and spanked them, but WSU sucks)

Georgia, 5th in their division, beat a ranked Ga Tech team

Vandy went to UM (and played them closer than the score indicated)

LSU played Arizona who beat Cal (and demolished them 45-3)

Kentucky plays Louisville every year

So the SEC had half their teams (maybe more) play teams that were at one point ranked in the top 25 out of conference.

I have said that it's not just who you lost to and how, it's who you beat and how.

The first thing you look at is who they beat that was a good win, then who they lost to that was a good loss, then who they lost to that was a bad loss and then who they beat that was a bad win.

Some people need to work on their reading skills.

If Boise State beat ONE team in the top 10 you might have an argument - but they didn't beat anybody in the top 25 all year.

The BCS system is just a stupid way to pick the national champion in college football. How do you really know who's the best team without a playoff system. I can see half a dozen teams making a claim to be the national champion.

The NCAA should put an end to this travesty and adopt a playoff.

Mtn Dew wrote:

I have said that it's not just who you lost to and how, it's who you beat and how.

But again, who has Florida really beaten? They have beaten conference opponents that APPEAR to be quality opponents. But we have no way of really knowing, do we? Beating conference foes does not give you instant credibility, ranked or not. The only non-conference opponent Florida beat who is bowl-eligible (barely) is Florida State, and that game was tight. Michigan at least beat the living shit out of Notre Dame in South Bend.

Boise State did beat up on Oregon State who is currently ranked. Of course, that's it. You can't play a shitty schedule, beat one team early on and then want a title chance. Boise State only has one decent win.

um to glendale wrote:

If Boise State beat ONE team in the top 10 you might have an argument - but they didn't beat anybody in the top 25 all year.

24. Oregon State

I believe Boise beat them, and Hawaii was also ranked as recently as last week.

They didn't beat anyone ever in the top 20 though

If you are going to argue that Tennessee, LSU and Arkansas aren't quality opponents you have lost any respect from me. There is no arguing that. Tennessee creamed Cal (albeit early), LSU demolished Arizona (who beat Cal late), and Arkansas has shown they are a legit top 15, if not top 10 team.

ok - so you agree that who you lost to does mean something? Good. Let's use your method -

UM and UF have both played three teams in the top 15. UM beat #5 and #11 - UF beat #4 and #12. Pretty close right? - so since the quality wins are so close than we should look at their only loss correct?

UM lost to #1 and UF lost to #10. I'd say that gives it to UM - and I used your method of looking at quality wins first (tie) and losses second (UM easily).