If USC destroys Michigan....

No Sagarin! Or. St is 6-3 in conference they lost to Boise St., UCLA, and WSU. UCLA is 5-4 in pac 10 and at one point lost 4 in a row. Thats why they are mediocre.

Sagarin wrote:

Not so fast my friend... wrote:

USC lost 2 games already! They are DONE for the Championship.

Oregon St. & UCLA = Mediocre.

USC title hopes - not a chance

By that logic, then Arkansas, Nebraska, and Notre Dame are worse than mediocre, since all were bitch-slapped by the Trojans.

The most likely scenario is that OSU exposes Florida for what they really are (because, after all, who has Florida really beaten?), USC-Michigan is really tight due to the game being in Southern California (I give USC the slight edge), and all of the other BCS games suck.

florida beat LSU, a top five BSC team or something like that. i think this game is gona be closer than everyone thinks (but OSU is unbelievable, and it could be a blow out, but i just dont think that is happening). i personally think UF plays em tough and has a better chance than most think. as for UM v. USC i wont pick a winner, i think that will be the best bowl game of the year (LSU will man-handle ND, BSU and OU will probably be good game and i think BSU can definatly win, but i dont think it will be as good a game as USC-Michigan, and i think Louiville destroys WF, and UF and OSU has the potential of being a blow out). it will be interesting if UF and Michigan both win, that happens to be what im rooting for :)

....hmmmmmmm, florida would then be the bcs champion. dude, usc lost to ucla AND oregon state. sick of u frickin' delusional arrogant trojan fans. you guys are good but don't deserve any national championship talk at this stage of the game.

The winner of the Ohio State/Florida game will be the national champion regardless of the outcomes of the other games. That is the ONLY reason for having the BCS. USC is not in the BCS championship game therefore they can NOT be the BCS champion.

Alan

Indeed, the Trojans DO NOT deserve a shot at the championship; however, they can play with anyone in the nation. They seem to play to the level of their competition, and far above it when it is good. I simply don't think the PAC-10 is as mediocre as everyone thinks, and USC's conference losses prove that.

OSU has proven that they are #1, because they are the only team to go unbeaten in a major conference, and none of their games were really close (at least the outcome was never in doubt, unlike some of Florida's games like the one against South Carolina). They also killed the defending national champs in Texas on the road, and they beat a very good and runner-up Michigan team (were it not for the "fudge factor" in the human polls). OSU will prove that Florida has no business being there, and USC will play Michigan well at home, though Michigan has more to prove.

Every other game will not be worth watching, though I will be slightly amused if Notre Dame is in the game against LSU. The funny thing is, had Louisville not lost that close game at Rutgers when they forgot how to scheme in the second half, they would be the undisputed #2.

...and that's with UofL losing Brohm for a few games and losing Michael Bush for the season. If they are both back next year UofL will be scary.

Alan

I agree. If you watched there first game against Kentucky, and admittedly Kentucky is no horse, they looked unbelievable. They would have been a legitimate contender were it not for losing Bush.

their

Runningart2004 wrote:

The winner of the Ohio State/Florida game will be the national champion regardless of the outcomes of the other games. That is the ONLY reason for having the BCS. USC is not in the BCS championship game therefore they can NOT be the BCS champion.

Alan

the AP also crowns a national champion. if anyone cares to remember, this is the one usc "won" in 2003. their "3-peat" attempt didn't actually exist last year. they were actually going for a 2 and a half peat.

the AP could actually vote michigan as the national champion if they blew out usc and florida won a slopfest against osu, though not likely. the coaches have agreed to vote whoever wins the bcs game number 1.

did anyone watch wisconsin push around the fast, smallish auburn team last year? when will people learn to not underestimate wisconsin. they're very well coached, they play team defense and usually have one of the better o-lines in the country with a big tough tailback to boot. they might not win, but they're never a pushover.

michigan and ohio state are just as fast on both sides of the ball as any sec team. i think usc matches up well with michigan, but ohio state's going to pose mismatches all over the field for florida on both sides of the ball. good luck with all the trick plays against the buckeyes. you'll find out there's such a thing as discipline in the big ten's elite teams. most trick plays end up in an 8 yard loss or a turnover.

the most overrated conference in the o

Runningart2004 wrote:

The winner of the Ohio State/Florida game will be the national champion regardless of the outcomes of the other games. That is the ONLY reason for having the BCS. USC is not in the BCS championship game therefore they can NOT be the BCS champion.

Alan

the AP also crowns a national champion. if anyone cares to remember, this is the one usc "won" in 2003. their "3-peat" attempt didn't actually exist last year. they were actually going for a 2 and a half peat.

the AP could actually vote michigan as the national champion if they blew out usc and florida won a slopfest against osu, though not likely. the coaches have agreed to vote whoever wins the bcs game number 1.

did anyone watch wisconsin push around the fast, smallish auburn team last year? when will people learn to not underestimate wisconsin. they're very well coached, they play team defense and usually have one of the better o-lines in the country with a big tough tailback to boot. they might not win, but they're never a pushover.

michigan and ohio state are just as fast on both sides of the ball as any sec team. i think usc matches up well with michigan, but ohio state's going to pose mismatches all over the field for florida on both sides of the ball. good luck with all the trick plays against the buckeyes. you'll find out there's such a thing as discipline in the big ten's elite teams. most trick plays end up in an 8 yard loss or a turnover. the most overrated conference in the country year in and year out is the sec. who do they play other than each other? tennessee beat cal and arkansas lost 50-14 to usc before having a great year and playing in the SEC title game. please let me know if any of the sec teams played and beat anyone else

Wisconsin has the most awesome offensive line in football (both college and pros... seriously, their O-line is bigger than NFL O-lines). UW should not be underestimated even though they didn't get to play a tough schedule.

Regardless of how the games are played, if Michigan and Florida both win, I think it'll be a split national championship. The AP voters know that the coaches are obligated to vote the BCS champ as #1. I think that would cause the AP voters to give their #1 votes to Michigan (if Mich and Fla both win, regardless of the scores).

Sagarin wrote:

By that logic, then Arkansas, Nebraska, and Notre Dame are worse than mediocre, since all were bitch-slapped by the Trojans.

ok one, the arkansas team that usc played is no where near the arkansas team of now. people have been moved around and people have gotten healthy; bottom line they are a completely different team now

Sagarin wrote:

Indeed, the Trojans DO NOT deserve a shot at the championship; however, they can play with anyone in the nation.

except UCLA and Oregon St.

Sagarin wrote:

I simply don't think the PAC-10 is as mediocre as everyone thinks, and USC's conference losses prove that.

USC's conference losses prove that the PAC-10 is mediocre! again, Oregon St is 6-3 in the conference losing to Boise St., UCLA, and WSU. UCLA is 5-4 in pac 10 and lost 4 in a row. The PAC-10 is a joke. no where near the SEC, not even a question

"i think usc matches up well with michigan"

How does USC match up well against michigan? Booty is exactly the kind of quarterback that the UM D-line will crush. And UM has many more weapons on offense - they can run with Hart (who will be pissed after being passed over to go to NYC for the Heisman) and manningham should be 100% - also don't forget that breaston has the Rose bowl record for total yard (315) - he tends to get up for bowl games.

thank you shipalum for probably one of the most insightful and well thought out comments on all this BCS crap. i agree with you 100% on everything you said.

USC... no wrote:

ok one, the arkansas team that usc played is no where near the arkansas team of now. people have been moved around and people have gotten healthy; bottom line they are a completely different team now

Ummm, original and insightful fella, I was being a smart ass, since everyone else tries to use this "complex" logic that USC is not that great because they lost to the likes of "medicocre" Pac-10 teams, as you yourself have reiterated for about the 100th time in your very next post. I know Arkansas is a vastly different team, as are Notre Dame and Nebraska, as is USC for that matter!

But here we go again. The SEC is the GREATEST conference in football. Why? Because, well, they just are. I mean how can you not see the speed week in and week out when they play each other and no one else in the country? Kind of wreaks of Miami-Florida St. Florida kind of wreaks of the Nebraska teams of yesteryear who scheduled out of conference pansies, ran the table in a questionably strong Big 12, and then got to play for the national championship.

You have no idea how good the SEC is, just like I have no idea how strong or weak the Pac-10 is.

USC... no wrote:

USC's conference losses prove that the PAC-10 is mediocre! again, Oregon St is 6-3 in the conference losing to Boise St., UCLA, and WSU. UCLA is 5-4 in pac 10 and lost 4 in a row. The PAC-10 is a joke. no where near the SEC, not even a question

Wow, you have corroborated your point with REAL and COMPELLING evidence, just like every other SEC fan on here. Thanks for you insightful and cutting edge opinion.

Yeah, too bad he doesn't corroborate his points with complete BS like you do.You do not understand college football. You are like that guy at work who rattles off a bunch of statistics and thinks he knows football.

Sagarin wrote:

USC... no wrote:

USC's conference losses prove that the PAC-10 is mediocre! again, Oregon St is 6-3 in the conference losing to Boise St., UCLA, and WSU. UCLA is 5-4 in pac 10 and lost 4 in a row. The PAC-10 is a joke. no where near the SEC, not even a question

Wow, you have corroborated your point with REAL and COMPELLING evidence, just like every other SEC fan on here. Thanks for you insightful and cutting edge opinion.

wolverine guy wrote:

"i think usc matches up well with michigan"

How does USC match up well against michigan? Booty is exactly the kind of quarterback that the UM D-line will crush. And UM has many more weapons on offense - they can run with Hart (who will be pissed after being passed over to go to NYC for the Heisman) and manningham should be 100% - also don't forget that breaston has the Rose bowl record for total yard (315) - he tends to get up for bowl games.

usc matches up well with anyone if you look at athlete versus athlete across the board. i agree that michigan will move the ball against usc, but michigan was exposed versus ohio state on the defensive side of the ball. usc's not a slouch on offense either with the best wideout tandem in the country with smith and jarrett. it's a pick em game in my opinion and i'd pick usc due to lloyd carr. and i won't forget breaston. as a penn state fan, i've always been scared to death every time he touches the ball. i'm a big 10 fan, so i'm rooting for michigan. i just don't have a good feeling about them playing usc.