Oh, and one more thing since you were very late to the party as I haven't posted on here for hours... Ohio State is favored over Florida by a wider margin than they were over Michigan when the game was IN COLUMBUS by neutral and very efficient oddsmakers! That should tell you something.
if then... wrote:
if its one and done...then why is florida in the title game...did i miss something? was florida undefeated?
Here is a sample of the people deciding the FB championship:
"If you beat a team one time, why do they get the national championship if they win the second time?," said Earle Bruce, the former Ohio State coach who votes in the Harris Interactive poll and moved Florida ahead of Michigan. "I mean, they've already played one time and lost."
I hope this idiot voted Boise State #2, or he better be prepared to argue Auburn or someone who beat them as the #1 team if Fl wins the game.
I feel FL and MI are equally worthy, but it is kind of sad that MI was essentially passed over because USC lost. My impression was that MI would have been ahead of Fl had USC won.
For all you experts arguing the case of either team, how is it possible to determine who is second best without a game? Unexpected results happen EVERY year in the BCS. Some of you must have no memory. ALL of you fanboys would reverse your arguments if you were a fan of the opposite team. Both MI and Fl have enough talent to beat OSU on a neutral field, and both deserve a shot to play in a tournament.
Also, how does the BCS lose money by having a playoff? It's not like the BCS games would be any less popular (more so in my opinion), and the sh*t bowls would be 10,000x times more interesting.
Holding true to form as a rabid and delusional SEC fan, huh Mtn Dew? How is Auburn more deserving than Wisconsin for a BCS berth? First, Wisco has only 1 loss, to the team we will soon see to be the 2nd best in the country. Auburn got shredded by a very mediocre Arkansas team and blitzed by a subpar Georgia team.
This is why the SEC is such a sham. People began to assume that Arkansas was good only after they beat Auburn (it certainly wasn't after the beating they took from USC). With a JV level quarterback and a swiss cheese defense, how could anyone seriously have thought Arkansas was any good? The fact that they won the SEC West further takes away from the SEC's credibility. Toughest Conference in the country? HA. That is laughable
dean edward smith wrote:
Its not the best year for the Big 10 top to bottom, but they produce in the bowl games where it counts.
]
Then remind us all again when THE OSU last beat an SEC team in a bowl game.
You anti SEC people sound like whiny Democrats after a presidential election. The SEC always fairs well in bowl seeding and the rest of you people are left to do nothing but bitch and moan.
One and done applies to Michigan.
Wow, 12 years? Thanks for the update.
Agreed, LSU will trounce ND.
How about Rutgers? (the Rodney Dangerfield of CB) They lose to WVU after 3 overtimes and as a consolation prize get to play Kansas State in something called the "Bumf--k" Texas Bowl and it airs on NFL network- not available in the metro NY area. The 15th ranked team in the country gets a no name bowl and the overrated leprecauns go to a BCS game. Oh, the humanity...
What do you all think would have happened if everything else had been the same, but OSU had lost to Michigan by 3 points and the game was in Michigan?
Given your scenario- OSU lost to Michigan at Ann Arbor. No rematch. OSU goes to another BCS bowl game. Then Mich plays FL in the NC game.
Remember, voting Florida ahead of Michigan was basically done by the college coaches. There was not a conspiracy by writers or anything else. Just that more coaches thought the Gators earned a chance and Michigan got an overwhelming majority of breaks and still lost to OSU.
I think there should be no game if OSU has to play Michigan. What if Michgan would win? Then what? Best 2 outa 3. Get over it you idiots!
Florida 2006 National Champs wrote:
dean edward smith wrote:Its not the best year for the Big 10 top to bottom, but they produce in the bowl games where it counts.
]
Then remind us all again when THE OSU last beat an SEC team in a bowl game.
You anti SEC people sound like whiny Democrats after a presidential election. The SEC always fairs well in bowl seeding and the rest of you people are left to do nothing but bitch and moan.
That's funny, I thought they sounded like whiny Republicans after a midterm election.
ohioan. wrote:
Remember, voting Florida ahead of Michigan was basically done by the college coaches. There was not a conspiracy by writers or anything else. Just that more coaches thought the Gators earned a chance and Michigan got an overwhelming majority of breaks and still lost to OSU.
People need to decide what their vote means. Are you voting to send somebody to a bowl game? or are you voting for who you actually believe is the 2nd best team in the country? If you truly believe that UM is the 2nd best team, but voted for UF for a bowl related reason ("UM already had their chance", "The NC should be between two conference champions", etc), than I think you voted in bad faith.
UM should be rewarded for being in the top two teams in the country this year.
Mitch wrote:
Holding true to form as a rabid and delusional SEC fan, huh Mtn Dew? How is Auburn more deserving than Wisconsin for a BCS berth? First, Wisco has only 1 loss, to the team we will soon see to be the 2nd best in the country. Auburn got shredded by a very mediocre Arkansas team and blitzed by a subpar Georgia team.
This is why the SEC is such a sham. People began to assume that Arkansas was good only after they beat Auburn (it certainly wasn't after the beating they took from USC). With a JV level quarterback and a swiss cheese defense, how could anyone seriously have thought Arkansas was any good? The fact that they won the SEC West further takes away from the SEC's credibility. Toughest Conference in the country? HA. That is laughable
HE'S delusional??? Dude, Wisconsin played one top 25 team and they LOST! Auburn played 3 (two of which are in BCS bowl games) and won 2! Their two losses are to a top 25 team and an 8-4 Georgia team. The only thing that is laughable here is your envy. GET OVER IT!!! I freakin' HATE Auburn, but even I can see the logic.
The SEC as a whole played a very incestuous schedule this year, so it's hard to tell how good they really are compared to the rest of the country. I think that's the problem most people have when you compare michigan and florida. At least you know that Michigan has a fighting chance in hell. Does Florida? Tough to say. They're either gonna prove the doubters wrong or they're gonna look like a buncha assholes. Anything worse then a 4-5 pt loss for them is probably going to smack of assholery. Should be fun either way. In fact I'm curious as to how the SEC as a whole will fair. They've got a big opportunity to shut stop the negative rumblings that started when Georgia got laughed out of their game with WV last year.
um should be in glendale wrote:
UM should be rewarded for being in the top two teams in the country this year.
According to the coaches, they are #3. They were rewarded by being invited to see where they stand against the PAC 10 champ, USC.
ohioan. wrote:
um should be in glendale wrote:UM should be rewarded for being in the top two teams in the country this year.
According to the coaches, they are #3. They were rewarded by being invited to see where they stand against the PAC 10 champ, USC.
Most of the arguments I keep hearing are about how "we already saw that game" and "only conference champs should be in the title game". There are a LOT of people who would have voted UM ahead of UF if USC won, but they switched up the order ONLY because USC lost and they didn't want UM in the title game.
um should be in glendale wrote:
Most of the arguments I keep hearing are about how "we already saw that game" and "only conference champs should be in the title game". There are a LOT of people who would have voted UM ahead of UF if USC won, but they switched up the order ONLY because USC lost and they didn't want UM in the title game.
What coach said this? I hear the talking heads saying this and all sorts of things, but it is their job to create controversy that may or may not be present. Again, what coach said this?
[/quote]
What coach said this? I hear the talking heads saying this and all sorts of things, but it is their job to create controversy that may or may not be present. Again, what coach said this?[/quote]
one coach who said it lives in Gainsville.
um should be in glendale wrote:
Most of the arguments I keep hearing are about how "we already saw that game" and "only conference champs should be in the title game". There are a LOT of people who would have voted UM ahead of UF if USC won, but they switched up the order ONLY because USC lost and they didn't want UM in the title game.
They switched up the order because Florida beat yet another highly ranked SEC team. Florida played four top 15 teams along with tough games against Georgia, South Carolina, and Alabama. That's a brutal schedule and to come out of it with only one loss to Auburn is deserving of an invite to the National Championship game IMO. Strength of schedule should play a large part in who is picked for the national championship game, and it looks like it has this year (note Wisconsins laughable schedule).
Michigan fans should stop complaining, the Rose bowl is going to be more fun to watch and will receive higher ratings.
We'll find out how brutal the SEC schedule Florida played really was come bowl season. Until then, it's anyone's guess because they only beat up on each other all year. This point is indisputable.