Florida in BCS

Mtn Dew wrote:

The LSU/Arizona game was Arizona's second game of the year :)

And their quarterbakc played most of the game with a concussion, walking around "glassy eyed," after being knocked stupid on their first drive.

I can't believe ND gets anywhere near a BCS bowl game. 2 losses and beat NOBODY. I'd rank them about 15th right now. We talk about the Big East or Pac 10 being down well Notre Dame doesn't even play in one other than beat up all the service academies. I'm sure they'll get some more talent and be a strong team eventually but this year they're very mediocre. Why don't we just designate a BCS bowl as the SHAMROCK BOWL and they can go there every year and lose just like usual.

dear god saragin... get over the f***ing "out of conference" shit youve been rambling on about for so long. UM hasnt played shit outside their conference... and dont say ND because they f***ing blow dick. gonna get raped by LSU

anyone who argues about an early loss is being an idiot, its early for both teams jesus christ you people. So what only the last 4 games when all the times are really playin their bestest matter, stfu and be accountable for what happens on the field. Michigan lost by 3 as well, not 10 or 14, if you wanna make bullshit speculation then lets give Michigan points for Henne missing Breaston downfield when he was 15 yards behind the defense, Michigan's superior defense slipping every other play, 2 broken tackle 50+ yard runs up the middle that would never happen again,the pussy ass helmet to helmet call when smith was scrambling that if not called would of ended the drive that doesnt even get called half the time (See: UCLA's Cowan getting blasted by USC defender) see i can play the bullshit what if, we should of beat you by 21 games.

Instead of getting Ohio Sate vs Michigan for the 104th time we get Ohio State vs Florida for the first time ever.

I think this is good.

the reason that florida got a rematch with florida state for their last national title was because they were the SEC champs and FL State was the ACC champ. In the old system that is why they played in the Sugar Bowl. Perhaps now it would be different and FL State would be in the title game and Florida would have gotten pushed out of the BCS title game and played for the sugar bowl title.

X Runner wrote:

Instead of getting Ohio Sate vs Michigan for the 104th time we get Ohio State vs Florida for the first time ever.

I think this is good.

So the BCS is there to create new matchups instead of having the two best teams play each other?

I bet you a million dollars that Michigan loses to USC.

F--- college football anyways...

Updated: Dec. 3, 2006, 8:57 PM ET

Florida's fine, but how is Michigan left out?

Wojciechowski

By Gene Wojciechowski

ESPN.com

Archive

If you're Michigan coach Lloyd Carr, how do you explain to your players that they won't be in the BCS Championship Game? How do you tell the second-best team in the country to get pumped about playing USC in the Runner-Up Bowl? How do you resist the urge of wishing Nutcracker drills on every person who jumped one-loss Florida ahead of the one-loss Wolverines in the final polls?

There is no polite way of saying it: Michigan got jobbed. Sunday's rankings are Exhibits A-Z why the BCS means well, but simply doesn't work -- and never will.

Carr had to do what Auburn's Tommy Tuberville did two seasons ago. Tuberville's team finished the regular season 12-0, but was left out of the Tostitos BCS Championship Game in favor of undefeated USC and Oklahoma.

"It's hard," said Tuberville. "It's hard to look them in the eye. Heck, we're still not over it. You never get over it. It's like a question that's never been answered."

Carr is asking those same questions. And he'll get the same shoulder shrugs that Tuberville got.

Let me get this straight: Michigan, which was unbeaten against all teams on its schedule ranked lower than No. 1, isn't going to Glendale, Ariz., for the Jan. 8 national title game because ...

• It didn't win its conference.

No, it didn't. But did you see who did? Team by the name of Ohio State. Maybe you've heard of the Buckeyes? Undefeated. Ranked first in the country. Beat Michigan in Columbus by the grand total of three whole points.

And feel free to show me in the BCS handbook where it says you've got to win your conference to play in the championship game?

• Nobody wants to see a rematch.

Just asking, but how did Ali-Frazier II and III work out? Or that Georgetown-Villanova Final Four?

I know Florida's Urban Meyer doesn't want to see a rematch, but he's not exactly an impartial observer, is he? And if Meyer were in Carr's Nikes, I guarantee you his objections to a second Ohio State-Michigan game would have disappeared.

A rematch, this time on a neutral field, would have been a game for the ages. And if you threatened to take away his precious sweater vest if he didn't tell the truth, I bet you Buckeyes' coach Jim Tressel would rather play Florida than have to face the Wolverines again (Tressel declined to vote in the final coaches' poll).

• Florida played a tougher schedule.

Agreed. But strength of schedule is part of the equation, nothing more. Tuberville's 2004 team had the strongest strength of schedule, but didn't make it.

You want to give the Gators the edge based on scheduling? Fair enough, though you could argue that Florida didn't exactly beat vintage Alabama, Georgia and Florida State teams this year, and Central Florida and Division I-AA Western Carolina were dreadful.

And look at the one loss each suffered by Florida and Michigan on their schedules. You tell me which defeat was more impressive: the Gators' 10-point road loss to an Auburn team that finished the season No. 9 in the BCS standings? Or the Wolverines' three-point road loss to an Ohio State now favored to win the national championship?

• The BCS system rewarded Florida for finishing its season with wins at FSU and against Arkansas at the SEC championship in Atlanta.

And the BCS penalized Michigan twice for being on the wrong end of the calendar: once when USC moved to No. 2 after beating Notre Dame (even though Michigan beat the Irish worse), and now, when Florida overtook the Wolverines (even though U of M's season ended two weeks ago).

How can you call this a "system" when Florida belongs to a league that plays a conference championship, and Michigan doesn't? How can you call it a quasi-playoff when Michigan drops twice in the standings without losing a game.

• Florida has earned the right to play Ohio State.

Absolutely true. But so has Michigan.

Ask the coaches at Vanderbilt (the Commodores played both Michigan and Florida this season) who is the better team, and the consensus pick -- privately, of course -- is the Wolverines. Florida has more speed and a handful of players to die for, they say, but Michigan is more physical, would control both sides of the line of scrimmage, have wonderful wide receivers, and are led by a senior quarterback who doesn't make many mistakes.

Ask them who would give Ohio State the better game, and you'll get the same answer.

Tuberville voted Ohio State, Florida and then Michigan on his final ballot. "But I watched Michigan this year," he said. "Heck, I think they could beat anybody. But that's the way the system is. It's a screwed-up system."

Michigan never had that chance. It was 11-1 on Nov. 18. It was 11-1 on Dec. 3. But between then and now the Wolverines apparently became the cellulite queens and somehow lost the swimsuit portion of this ridiculous BCS beauty pageant.

Michigan didn't do a thing wrong. And yet Carr was the one who had to console his team Sunday night. He did it, but here's guessing he wasn't Mr. Congeniality.

Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at

.

Hmmmm the Commissioner of the SEC is also the BCS commissioner. That is convenient.

Wake up people it is all about the money. Division 1 football is the only "championship" without a playoff of some sort. It is a popularity contest with as much legitimacy as a 7th grade class presidential vote.

gatorsssss wrote:

dear god saragin... get over the f***ing "out of conference" shit youve been rambling on about for so long. UM hasnt played shit outside their conference... and dont say ND because they f***ing blow dick. gonna get raped by LSU

You know why non-conference games matter? Just look at Florida St.-Miami every year. They make each other look great and we have to hear from all the pundits about their fast defenses and how legit these two teams are, and we all know how the story generally ends. Yes, I know all about the rough-and-tumble defense in the SEC. I also know that the SEC generally does not perform well in the big bowl games either.

Perhaps the most telling indicator is that the notoriously efficient oddsmakers have OSU favored by more than a touchdown over Florida. No way they get that kind of edge over either Michigan or USC.

H.G. wrote:

I bet you a million dollars that Michigan loses to USC.

F--- college football anyways...

I'll bet you're right, particularly with the game being at the Rose Bowl. But that doesn't mean that Michigan isn't the #2 team in the nation right now.

The BCS should be called the "Money Bowls" as it is not about the best teams in the country playing in the games...but a program which gets the money to the big schools....Wisconsin is ranked 7th and doesn't get to play in a BCS game is bull....

Overall Record:

UF - 12-1

UM-11-1

Wins vs. teams receiving bowl berths:

UF - 9

UM - 6

Wins vs teams with records below .500:

UF - 3

UM - 5

Opponents combined records:

UF opponents - 90-54

UM opponents - 83-50

Opponents wins vs. then top 25 teams:

UF opponents - 11

UM opponents - 3

Record vs. current top 25 teams:

UF - 3-1

UM - 1-1

Average margin of victory:

UF - 13.5

UM - 17.3

Conference Title:

UF - Yes

UM - No

As for UF getting a rematch in the 97 Sugar Bowl, please remember, Florida played a game between the Sugar Bowl and the FSU game in Tallahassee. They ARK in the SEC championship game...the SEC winner automatically goes to the Sugar...the media and the coaches sent FSU to the Sugar, not vice-versa.

Sagarin wrote:

I also know that the SEC generally does not perform well in the big bowl games either.

You want to back that up with facts, or are you just talking out of your ass again, as usual?

who the hell wants to see a rematch? I know I don't. Who deserves to see OSU between Michigan and Florida? Probably UF because Michigan already lost to them. But what about Boise State, they haven't lost a game this year. Should they have the right to play OSU? Or should they be nixed just because of the schedule argument?

I think it's time for the playoff system. Pretty much everyone agrees with it, why don't we stop beating around the bush and get the change done with already.

Soapy McStupidtonfieldville wrote:

You want to back that up with facts, or are you just talking out of your ass again, as usual?

Oh I must be talking out of my ass. Let's start with the not so subtle Georgia loss to West Virginia last year. All of you (some of the names have changed) were touting the mighty SEC, just like this year. And how about Auburn getting blown out by Big Ten #3 Wisconsin? Remember, I am talking about BIG games here. Oh sure, Alabama narrowly beats Texas Tech, but South Carolina loses to a very average Missouri team. Sure, the results are MIXED, but not heavily in FAVOR of arguing FOR the SEC. Remember, the Big 12 went some @ 7-1 against the spread last year. The SEC didn't even come close.

How about 2004... LSU losing to Iowa and Auburn struggling with and not covering the spread against Virgina Tech. Or 2003, where Iowa handily beat Florida on New Years Day and Clemson somehow up-ended Tennessee. Sure, LSU won the title as I previously conceded, but everyone knows that USC should have been in that game and not Oklahoma. I could go on. The results are mixed, at best, but I bet if you dug deeper, the SEC would be under .500 against the spread.

Look, I really don't have an aversion to the SEC. Like I said, I would be the first person in line to argue in favor of Florida had they beaten a top-ten, non-conference team HANDILY on the road like Michigan, OSU, and USC all did this year. Just don't give me this, "Well, we deserve it because we beat Tennessee and LSU" crap.

GVILLE wrote:

Record vs. current top 25 teams:

UF - 3-1

UM - 1-1

First of all, I didn't go through all of these stats with a fine-tooth comb, but I did notice one glaring mistake. Michigan at least beat Notre Dame and Wisconsin, losing only to #1 OSU. So this is wrong, which makes me question some of the rest. As long as we are data mining, I bet USC would beat Florida in a lot of these categories, but no one would argue that they should go to the title game.

Mtn Dew wrote:

The SEC has played many good out of conference teams in the past, now and in the future...

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.

5 current top-25 opponents for the 12 SEC teams. Okay, fair enough.

Here's a little perspective. The Pac-10 who always gets ripped on for being weak played the following non-conference games:

USC beat #11 Notre Dame, #12 Arkansas (road), #22 Nebraska

UCLA beat decent Rice & Utah squads & lost to #11 Notre Dame (road)

Arizona beat #19 BYU & lost to #4 LSU (road)

ASU beat a decent Nevada team & Colorado (road) who turned out to be lousy.

Cal lost to #17 Tennessee (road) & beat Minnesota

Stanford lost to #11 Notre Dame (road)

Oregon beat #7 Oklahoma

Oregon St. beat Hawaii (road) Saturday (they were top-25 until the loss)

Washington lost to #7 Oklahoma (road)

WSU lost to #10 Auburn (road) and beat Baylor

That's 11 current top-25 opponents for the ten teams in the conference. Not to mention the fact that Pac-10 has 9 conference games, meaning they only played 3 non-conference opponents apiece. Still think the SEC plays a tough non-conference schedule?

Here's another fun tidbit. Stanford is the only Pac-10 team that lost a non-conference game against a team that is not currently in the top-25.