Florida in BCS

Looking at bowl games from 2005 back to 1980, there were 43 bowl games that matched up an SEC team vs a Big 10 team...

Of those 43 head to head games, the SEC won 28, the Big ten won 15.

SEC is 28-15 vs the Big 10.. A winning % of .6511 or a little better than 65%

When you factor in that most of these games were a lower seeded SEC team vs a higher seeded Big 10 team, it is even more impressive.

I'm certain Florida would have picked up some votes on Michigan, but whether it would have been enough to jump them in the polls is a tough call. Personally, I feel that even if USC had won Florida still should have made the national championship game based on strength of schedule, so maybe I'm biased.

um should be in glendale wrote:

one coach who said it lives in Gainsville.

The majority of coaches slected Florida #2 & Michigan #3. Using Urban Meyer's ramblings as "most of the arguments..."

is inaccurate. You are guessing this.

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.

Truthiness wrote:

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).

I couldn't agree with you more that strenght of schedule SHOULD matter, and if you go and check most of the ratings systems that use SOS, they rank Michigan AHEAD of Florida. The neutral oddsmakers also rate Michigan ahead of Florida based on the spread they have put on the game. The SEC could DAMN WELL be the best conference in the country. But NO ONE knows for sure. Beating your own conference brethren who could quite possibly be subjectively and arbitrarily ranked too high does not prove shit.

The guy who pointed out the bowl record of the SEC against the Big Ten (who knows if it's accurate or if they fared nearly as well against the spread -- the stat that really MATTERS) conveniently failed to mention that the SEC's overall record against all other conferences, and, more importantly, their record against the SPREAD is mediocre. Go and do the research yourselves.

In reply to no one...

The story isnt Florida being in there over Michigan. There are points to make on both sides.

The real story is Wisconson. Though they played a weak schedual ...possibly very weak depending on how you want to rank penn state (they only lost to ranked teams) either way they are still ranked 7th or 8th in the BCS and do not get to go to a bowl game because they are the third team from one conference.

I believe they probably will get trounced by Arkansa but they should be in a bcs bowl because of thier ranking

Schwab said it himself and I dare you to stump him

Being a Buckeye fan I would not want to play Michigan again. They are not better than the Buckeyes but would have been playing with incentive. I do feel Florida and Michigan both deserved this game. One of them was going to get screwed. The thing is, no Michigan didn't win their conference and it just so happens the team that did is #1. Also, they did have their chance. Now the argument about so did Florida in 96 is a bad argument. When Florida played FSU they were ranked number #4. They got lucky because that day #2 and #3 both lost and then they beat FSU. There was no BCS then. It is a totally different scenario than what we are seeing. I do agree that the game earlier this year was worse than it looked but Michigan did fight to stay in the game. A neutral sight may change that but it isn't going to happen. One of these teams were going to get screwed it just happened to be Michigan. Go to the Rose Bowl and crush USC and hope OSU crushes Florida. That will state your case.

matty mocopuffs wrote:

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.

Uh, the score was 38-35, I wouldn't necessarily say they were laughed out of that game. If Rodriguez does not call the fake punt to seal the deal I don't think there's anyone that watched that game that can say WVU had a chance in hell of stopping UGA from taking the lead. UGA dominated quarters 2-4. I'm not saying they should have won, b/c they obviously didn't...they slept through the first quarter. But to say they got laughed out of that game is inaccurate - if anything they showed heart by battling back and almost winning when they were down 28-0. Did UGA's DC not prepare very well for this game? Yes. Was WVU's talent better than UGA? No way. Anyone who says it was did not watch the whole game or was looking for an excuse to take a shot at the SEC.

All I know is that most of the conferences are probably fairly equal in terms of their overall strength from year to year, so to condemn one conference simply because it APPEARS to be weak is unjust, just as it is to automatically label another conference as a premier conference, SEC, Big 11, and Big 12 included. The Pac-10 is often banished as a second-tier conference, but SC can't get through their own conference without losing twice, yet they beat the near-best of the other major conferences quite easily.

I have nothing against the SEC. They may yet prove that they are INDEED the very best conference in all the land. But I find it amazing, just shy of miraculous actually, that all these people actually already KNOW that the SEC is the best conference. Clearly, they're a step ahead of the rest of us to be able to glean that information from looking at the same set of facts as the rest of us. Man, do I wish I had that kind of insight and prophetic ability.

Truthiness wrote:

I'm certain Florida would have picked up some votes on Michigan, but whether it would have been enough to jump them in the polls is a tough call. Personally, I feel that even if USC had won Florida still should have made the national championship game based on strength of schedule, so maybe I'm biased.

You feel a 1-loss UF team would've deserved it over a 1-loss USC team because of their schedule? Now that's funny. Florida's out of conference opponents:

Southern Miss 8-5

UCF 4-8

Western Carolina (1-AA) 2-9!

Florida State 6-6

USC's OOC:

Arkansas 10-3 (#12)

Nebraska 9-4 (#23)

Notre Dame 10-2 (#11)

All of them finished ranked in the BCS and the Pac-10 edges out the SEC in almost all rankings as the toughest conference.

Hey man - I am an SEC fan and I whole-heartedly agree that it's a little ridiculous when fans AND the media always say that it's the best conference in the country. I think there is a lot of parity amongst the conferences now and cringe when I hear these homers do this (it's not just the SEC either...I know plenty of Big 10ers who are the same, it's always the same people who are eternal optimists about their specific teams as well!) I just hate when people go to the extreme and try to RAG on the conference just b/c of this and say uneducated things (not that you are, but others have been on here). The SEC may or may not be the best conference - whichever one is the best, I guarantee someone is a close 2nd - but it definitely does not suck, as some have said it does.

Anyone making the argument that the PAC10 is a tougher conference than the SEC is an idiot. Any ranking that states as much is useless.

Thanks for making his valid point extra clear, douche.

And by the way, I don't think the Pac-10 is necessarily better than the SEC THIS YEAR, but you have no idea how good it is. I don't either. All I know is USC lost to two top-25 ranked teams in conference, but they obliterated Nebraska (Big 12 #2), Arkansas (SEC #2), and Notre Dame (Independents #1). Does that mean they're better than Florida? I think so, but I have no idea. However, at least they took a risk and matched up against other conferences both early and late.

OSU should probably be playing the Raiders. As a neutral observer, it seems like even though the Florida fans got what they wanted, they seem to be complaining and whining the most. Super weak.

"Uh, the score was 38-35, I wouldn't necessarily say they were laughed out of that game. If Rodriguez does not call the fake punt to seal the deal I don't think there's anyone that watched that game that can say WVU had a chance in hell of stopping UGA from taking the lead. UGA dominated quarters 2-4. I'm not saying they should have won, b/c they obviously didn't...they slept through the first quarter. But to say they got laughed out of that game is inaccurate - if anything they showed heart by battling back and almost winning when they were down 28-0. Did UGA's DC not prepare very well for this game? Yes. Was WVU's talent better than UGA? No way. Anyone who says it was did not watch the whole game or was looking for an excuse to take a shot at the SEC"

Fair enough. "laughed out of the game" was way too strong on my part. Maybe it was just the impression I was left with after seeing them get down so big. Anyway, I noticed how you didn't address any of my other comments about the unknown power of the SEC as a confernce. I guess your just as curious about how Florida will do as I am.

divthree wrote:

OSU should probably be playing the Raiders. As a neutral observer, it seems like even though the Florida fans got what they wanted, they seem to be complaining and whining the most. Super weak.

As a Florida fan, I did not get what I wanted. Had USC beaten UCLA, or Michigan retained the number two ranking Florida probably would have played Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl, which would have been an emminently winnable game. Instead we get Ohio State, easily the best team in the country, on a neutral field. I give Florida 1 or 2 chances in 10 of winning that game. Tressel seems to have built a team which fits his philosophy perfectly, and has loaded it with tremendous athletes. Meyer has some extremely good athletes, but hasn't yet succeeded in matching them with his offensive philosophy. I don't being dominated in the National Champioship game is better for Florida than a likely win in the Sugar Bowl.

As a college football fan, I think this outcome was both inevitable and good. Inevitable, as a make up to the SEC for the Auburn snub, and good in that there really isn't much difference between Michigan and Florida. Because of that the voters favored a non-rematch over a rematch. I think the computer polls for the BCS actually told the story, Michigan and Florida tied for 2nd and that is probably very close to the truth.

TOSU vs Oakland Raiders... 7 weeks to prepare... Tressel vs. Shell... I think the Raiders win (Porter and Moss would be unstoppable) but if I had to wager I would take the Buckeyes and 10+ points.

The Pac 10 is a one team conference. Who is the second best team? Oregon State? They lost to Boise State badly? Cal? They were demolished at UT. Oregon? They didn't look to hot down the stretch.

The Pac10 is a one team pony.

Oakland would beat the Buckeyes by 21 pts.

no wonder Florida looses. With fans like you, who needs enemies? More like an enema.

You are a joke to the whole Florida nation a--wipe.