I guess that means I was correct about needing 12 teams to have a playoff under current NCAA rules. In an ideal world Notre Dame would be part of the Big 10, but even after years of courtship by the Big 10 (and that is its name even if the count doesn't add up) they prefer to stay independent. My guess is it's a financial and control issue.
matty mocopuffs wrote:
"USC routinely beats up on Arkansas and Auburn year after year. I don't care that it's early in the season"
Look, I'm not disagreeing with your overall point. In fact, I think it has a lot of merit. But using the Arkansas game as a measure of USC's out-of-conference strength is not fallacious because it was an early season match-up. It's fallacious because Arkansas was without McFadden, possibly the best back in the nature. Arkansas might not be .500 without that guy.
McFadden played in the damn game. I'm tired of that argument.
wolvogator wrote:
I guess that means I was correct about needing 12 teams to have a playoff under current NCAA rules. In an ideal world Notre Dame would be part of the Big 10, but even after years of courtship by the Big 10 (and that is its name even if the count doesn't add up) they prefer to stay independent. My guess is it's a financial and control issue.
You are grossly uninformed on the 100+ history of Notre Dame and Big 10 relations. Notre Dame will never join that conference. Furthermore, joining the Big 10 would significantly weaken their schedule
* 100+ YEAR history
2 cents wrote:
...I don't see how Florida should jump ahead of Michigan in the rankings because they won an extra game.
My argument is, no matter what U-M is ranked, they should not play OSU again. They already played just 2 weeks ago, and lost a close, but never-in-doubt game. It already happened. No one can tell me that the entire rest of the country cannot produce 1 very worthy challenger to OSU. To have only 2 higher ranked teams in the entire country as playing #1 OSU this season is wrong. I do understand the BCS is all about rankings, but in this case, if we're talking what's ideal, I disagree.
1) If USC had won last night would UF be #3 and UM #4? I doubt it and if not than this is complete bs. The order between two teams shouldn't change because a third party lost.
2) I keep hearing people say UM would be getting a "mulligan" if they got in. UF lost too - and to a two-loss team. UM lost by three points to a no-loss team. UM's "mulligan" would come from a tee shot that dribbled off a postage stamp island green 250 yards out with a 30 mile an hour wind in their face. UF might get a "mulligan" from losing to a team that won't even be in a BCS bowl game.
ttc - do you think Florida has a better chance than UM of beating OSU on a neutral field?
um to glendale wrote:
1) If USC had won last night would UF be #3 and UM #4? I doubt it and if not than this is complete bs. The order between two teams shouldn't change because a third party lost.
2) I keep hearing people say UM would be getting a "mulligan" if they got in. UF lost too - and to a two-loss team. UM lost by three points to a no-loss team. UM's "mulligan" would come from a tee shot that dribbled off a postage stamp island green 250 yards out with a 30 mile an hour wind in their face. UF might get a "mulligan" from losing to a team that won't even be in a BCS bowl game.
Maybe you guys should've laid up.
As I see it, it is a no lose situation. Michigan gets the nod and they are the only team left quite capable of beating OSU. On the other hand, Florida gets in and OSU wins convincingly, proving that the Gators never should have been there in the first place.
quote]
You are grossly uninformed on the 100+ history of Notre Dame and Big 10 relations. Notre Dame will never join that conference. Furthermore, joining the Big 10 would significantly weaken their schedule[/quote]
Right - just like PSU was going to blow apart the Big Ten every year.
um to glendale wrote:
Urban must have been making some phone calls -
Coaches poll
1. Ohio State (62) 12-0 1,550
2. Florida 12-1 1,470
3. Michigan 11-1 1,444
4. LSU 10-2 1,299
5. Wisconsin 11-1 1,263
This is a joke. I'm a Wisconsin fan, but I'll admit they had a weak schedule this year, with Michigan being the only decent team. Big 10 outside of OSU, Michigan, and Wisconsin stunk! The badgers played Buffalo for goodness sakes, Buffalo. Florida deserves to play OSU and will probably win. The Big 10 will get smoked in bowl games this year.
um to glendale wrote:
Right - just like PSU was going to blow apart the Big Ten every year.
What does that have to do with anything? I never said ND would blow apart the Big 10 every year if they joined it (although if they had Purdue's schedule they would). Notre Dame plays Michigan and USC every year. ND has a more difficult rated schedule than every Big 10 team except for Michigan. And that's after GT turned out to be a bust.
If Florida plays Ohio State in the championship game and Florida loses by more than a field goal (what Michigan lost to them by), then we'll know who REALLY deserved to be in that game.
overrated big 10 wrote:
This is a joke. I'm a Wisconsin fan, but I'll admit they had a weak schedule this year, with Michigan being the only decent team. Big 10 outside of OSU, Michigan, and Wisconsin stunk! The badgers played Buffalo for goodness sakes, Buffalo. Florida deserves to play OSU and will probably win. The Big 10 will get smoked in bowl games this year.
You know, you could very well be right when it's all said and done. I would never argue that the Big Ten was the toughest conference on the merits of their conference play alone. But some of the top teams did step out and convincingly beat worthy opponents from other conferences on the road. That's about the only objective measure of greatness that we have at this point.
if ND replaced the USC game with OSU and replaced Army, Navy, and Air Force with any Big 10 teams their schedule would have been harder this year.
saywhat?!?! wrote:
If Florida plays Ohio State in the championship game and Florida loses by more than a field goal (what Michigan lost to them by), then we'll know who REALLY deserved to be in that game.
No, you won't.
I hear a lot of talk about how a team shouldn't play for the national championship if they haven't won their conference.
What about a school like Notre Dame then that plays a non-conference schedule.
All these people saying that a team should have to win their conference to play for the national title...what if they don't have a conference to win.
um to glendale wrote:
if ND replaced the USC game with OSU and replaced Army, Navy, and Air Force with any Big 10 teams their schedule would have been harder this year.
Wrong. Air Force and Army are comparable to Illinois and Indiana. Navy finished 9-3. UCLA and GT are better teams than the average Big 10 team. And ND played Penn State this year.
if the purpose of the BCS is to (a)get the top two teams in the country at a bowl game than you have to go with UM vs. OSU. If the purpose is to make sure (b)everybody gets a "chance" to win a NC than I guess UF should play.
I can't imagine any unbiased person saying that the main purpose of the BCS should be (b) and not (a).
um to glendale wrote:
if the purpose of the BCS is to (a)get the top two teams in the country at a bowl game than you have to go with UM vs. OSU. If the purpose is to make sure (b)everybody gets a "chance" to win a NC than I guess UF should play.
I can't imagine any unbiased person saying that the main purpose of the BCS should be (b) and not (a).
Michigan had their chance and lost. If Florida wins, (it is official, they are "in"), I guess it will be settled. But saying Michigan is the better team and not Florida is just opinion. Thank God the majority of sports writers and coaches around the country know that Michigan had their shot and lost. Why give them a second shot?