November 19, 2006 at 07:20AM View BBCode
Ohio won the thing, if you haven't heard, despite the wave of dead coach sympathy rooting for Michigan.November 19, 2006 at 11:41AM View BBCode
The real mourning should be saved for the Scarlet Knights of Rutgers. I really wanted them to make the BCS title game...November 19, 2006 at 02:01PM View BBCode
Originally posted by bobcat73
Yes and sadly USC won also.
November 19, 2006 at 05:02PM View BBCode
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Originally posted by bobcat73
Yes and sadly USC won also.
Why is this sad? Logic SHOULD prevail. It probably WON'T, but it should.
The #2 team went ON THE ROAD and lost to the #1 TEAM by THREE POINTS.
That's what's SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN when #1 plays #2 in their backyard. Their is absolutely no justification to drop Michigan any lower than #2 in the polls. And as long as that doesn't happen, it doesn't matter what USC does.
November 19, 2006 at 05:08PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Rank them wherever you want, as long as they don't play in the title game.
If you don't win your conference, you don't deserve a shot at the national championship.
Best playoff system in the world man.
November 19, 2006 at 05:50PM View BBCode
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Rank them wherever you want, as long as they don't play in the title game.
If you don't win your conference, you don't deserve a shot at the national championship.
Best playoff system in the world man.
If that's what you want, then the BCS commissioners need to change the rules to state that. As it is, if anyone other than Michigan plays Ohio State, then you don't have #1 and #2 playing in the title game. And if USC gets there and beats Ohio State, and Michigan wins the Rose Bowl, then Michigan should be #1.
USC's loss...Oregon State.
Michigan's loss...Ohio State.
That says all that needs to be said right there.
Go Irish!
BTW, I'm not a Michigan fan. Heck, I don't even like the Big 10 conference. But right is right and fair is fair. The way the BCS rules are right now, there is no prohibition against either rematches or a team that does not win its conference playing in the title game. Don't like that, change the rules. But under the rules as they exist now, Michigan still deserves to be #2 and in that title game.
November 19, 2006 at 06:10PM View BBCode
Not impressed. Michigan strength of schedule? 13. Southern Cal strength of schedule? 16.November 19, 2006 at 06:16PM View BBCode
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Not impressed. Michigan strength of schedule? 13. Southern Cal strength of schedule? 16.
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Put Michigan and USC on a neutral field and what's the Vegas line?
November 19, 2006 at 06:20PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Bones2484
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Not impressed. Michigan strength of schedule? 13. Southern Cal strength of schedule? 16.
According to who? Sagarin has USC #3 and Michigan #12 in SoS.
November 19, 2006 at 06:20PM View BBCode
Would you like to continue your whining? Michigan is not the #2 team in the country. USA Today already has USC at 2, and Michigan at 3.November 19, 2006 at 06:21PM View BBCode
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Originally posted by Bones2484
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Not impressed. Michigan strength of schedule? 13. Southern Cal strength of schedule? 16.
According to who? Sagarin has USC #3 and Michigan #12 in SoS.
CBS SportsLine...which also shows Florida ranked 3rd in the country and USC fourth. So why wouldn't Florida be in line for the BCS shot if it can't be Michigan?
November 19, 2006 at 06:25PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Bones2484
Since when is CBS Sportsline used for anything important?
November 19, 2006 at 06:27PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Originally posted by Bones2484
Since when is CBS Sportsline used for anything important?
Since it's easier to support your faulty case with polls that no one cares about.
November 19, 2006 at 06:27PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Would you like to continue your whining? [/qhote]
Who's whining? I'm simply presenting an entirely credible argument, which you are unable to refute.
Michigan is not the #2 team in the country. USA Today already has USC at 2, and Michigan at 3.
Which simply shows that the BCS mess factored into how the voters cast their votes.
I never denied that this was how it would turn out. I simply showed why it shouldn't.
Yes, USC lost to Oregon State. I'm over it, you should accept it and move on.
Yes, they did. And that's enough to make them NOT the #2 team in the country.
Michigan has an inferior schedule, as referenced by bones, lost to the best team on their schedule, and did not win their conference.
Well, they didn't have an inferior schedule according CBS Sportsline. If there are others who show they did, fine. If losing to the best team on your schedule is a damning indictment, what is losing to Oregon State...the fifth or sixth best team on USC's schedule? And as I've said, in the BCS criteria as they exist today, winning your conference is irrelevant. You just have to keep bringing it up because its the only argument you have.
USC has one of the toughest schedules in the country, BEAT the best team on their schedule, and is a conference champion.
But not quite as tough as Michigan, according to CBS at least; LOST to the 5th or 6th best team on their schedule; and winning their conference...again...is irrelevant, at least as the BCS criteria are currently set up.
I suggest you go simulate a couple seasons of NCAA on your playstation until Michigan ends up in the national championship. Because it isn't happening in real life.
That you would even suggest such a thing proves that we are worlds apart in points of reference.
Go Irish!
November 19, 2006 at 06:31PM View BBCode
The only way I will possibly argue that Michigan deserves a rematch is if USC loses to ND, Ark loses to LSU, and Florida loses to Ark.November 19, 2006 at 06:32PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Bones2484
Anyone else find it ironic that the SEC broadcast station would have Florida ranked ahead of USC?
Yea... neither do I.
November 19, 2006 at 06:34PM View BBCode
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindexNovember 19, 2006 at 06:46PM View BBCode
What, you weren't impressed by the win over Western Kentucky?November 19, 2006 at 06:48PM View BBCode
Hey Kinslow. I overheard last night at the game that we are currently working with Miami to be our 3rd non-conference next season since Idaho is too scared (rightfully so) to play us.November 19, 2006 at 07:09PM View formatted
November 19, 2006 at 07:14PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Yea, and then we've got a home and home with Ohio State after that
November 19, 2006 at 07:32PM View BBCode
Lets straighten out a couple of things here.November 19, 2006 at 07:44PM View BBCode
Originally posted by barterer2002
1) USC is not in the same class with Miami as one of the most hated schools in the country. There is a sentiment to knock them off because they've certainly been the best team over the past three to five seasons buts that's more about rooting for the underdog than "hating" USC. The two of you may perceive hatred for USC simply because of you own attitudes that the National Championship Game is a birthright for USC and that anyone who argues otherwise "hates" USC.
Pages: 1