Sim Dynasty

View Old Forum Thread

Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » USC Vs. UCLA
Bones2484

December 03, 2006 at 06:50PM View BBCode

Basically, from a fan's perspective of College Football. I would rather see Florida face OSU in the NC.

But I have no doubt that it will be Michigan. And sadly, I will most likely not be watching this game.

I hate Florida, I hate the SEC, I like Michigan, I like the Big10. But the fact remains that I just cannot support a rematch in a NC that includes a non-conference champion without a playoff system in place.
lvnwrth

December 03, 2006 at 06:50PM View BBCode

Originally posted by Bones2484
Take the stick out of your ass for a second and tell us WHY you want to see Michigan play OSU again for a National Championship.


Take the blinders off and read my posts before you come drooling and ranting. Apparently you either missed the part...or failed to comprehend the part...where I wrote that I don't particularly want to see a rematch, and I believe that its not good for the BCS. That's why I said responding to the USC faithful was a waste of time. You just validated my statement.
Bones2484

December 03, 2006 at 06:58PM View BBCode

Originally posted by lvnwrth
Originally posted by Bones2484
Take the stick out of your ass for a second and tell us WHY you want to see Michigan play OSU again for a National Championship.


Take the blinders off and read my posts before you come drooling and ranting. Apparently you either missed the part...or failed to comprehend the part...where I wrote that I don't particularly want to see a rematch, and I believe that its not good for the BCS. That's why I said responding to the USC faithful was a waste of time. You just validated my statement.


You're right, I misread it. I must have just happened to pass over the one line that you said that in all of your moaning about why Michigan should be #2.

Then what, as a fan, do you want to see?

[Edited on 12-3-2006 by Bones2484]
barterer2002

December 03, 2006 at 09:54PM View BBCode

lvnwrth

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Your argument is that Michigan should get the rematch because there are no rules preventing a rematch.

I guess my first question is what are the rules since I thought the voters could vote for whomever they wish. If, as a voter, my opinion is that a conference champ is better than the runner up why is that wrong simply because the runner up almost won?
rkinslow19

December 04, 2006 at 05:54AM View BBCode

Originally posted by barterer2002
lvnwrth

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Your argument is that Michigan should get the rematch because there are no rules preventing a rematch.

I guess my first question is what are the rules since I thought the voters could vote for whomever they wish. If, as a voter, my opinion is that a conference champ is better than the runner up why is that wrong simply because the runner up almost won?


In lvnwrth's book, when two good teams play, losses don't count.
rkinslow19

December 04, 2006 at 05:55AM View BBCode

Also, in regards to USC, sagarin still has them rated #2 in the country.
scaffdog

December 04, 2006 at 03:38PM View BBCode

thier SCHEDULE is rated #2 in the country. His computer ranking used in the BCS has USC 4th behind OSU, Michigan, and Florida, in that order.
max_fischer

December 04, 2006 at 04:00PM View BBCode

Did anybody see that one computer of the BCS Six has Florida ranked NUMBER ONE?? As in, ahead of Ohio State? That would be the Colley Matrix. Seems like they should 86 the Colley Matrix and just borrow somebody's iMac for next year's BCS. I mean, seriously.
lvnwrth

December 04, 2006 at 05:38PM View BBCode

Originally posted by rkinslow19
Originally posted by barterer2002
lvnwrth

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Your argument is that Michigan should get the rematch because there are no rules preventing a rematch.

I guess my first question is what are the rules since I thought the voters could vote for whomever they wish. If, as a voter, my opinion is that a conference champ is better than the runner up why is that wrong simply because the runner up almost won?


In lvnwrth's book, when two good teams play, losses don't count.


Another example of why its pointless to try to respond to USC fans. What a stupid, stupid statement. But then, consider the source.
lvnwrth

December 04, 2006 at 05:45PM View BBCode

Originally posted by rkinslow19
Also, in regards to USC, sagarin still has them rated #2 in the country.


http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/BCSStandings


According to the BCS standings on the ESPN site, JS (Jeff Sagarin) has USC 4th, after Ohio State, Michigan, and Florida.
lvnwrth

December 04, 2006 at 05:46PM View BBCode

Originally posted by scaffdog
thier SCHEDULE is rated #2 in the country. His computer ranking used in the BCS has USC 4th behind OSU, Michigan, and Florida, in that order.


Stop it! You'll only confuse him with the truth.
max_fischer

December 04, 2006 at 06:02PM View BBCode

I don't think UM got robbed really. It was close, and Florida won a big game. To me it would have been a little worse if Florida's win over Arkansas had not changed their standing at all.
Bones2484

December 04, 2006 at 07:19PM View BBCode

I love how lvnwrth tries to weasel out of arguments by just saying there's no point to responding to USC fans. Especially considering the arguments were Florida vs Michigan and had nothing to do with USC.

Oh well, not like his opinions were ever worth reading anyways... we won't miss him in this thread, or any others.
scaffdog

December 04, 2006 at 07:39PM View BBCode

Originally posted by max_fischer
I don't think UM got robbed really. It was close, and Florida won a big game. To me it would have been a little worse if Florida's win over Arkansas had not changed their standing at all.


I head someone making the statement this mornign that if OSU had beaten michigan Saturady at the same time Florida was playing that there would have been a rematch. I actually think Florida's Victory would have been more resoudnig for the #2 spot had that happened.
Bones2484

December 04, 2006 at 10:02PM View formatted

You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
[quote][i]Originally posted by scaffdog[/i]
I head someone making the statement this mornign that if OSU had beaten michigan Saturady at the same time Florida was playing that there would have been a rematch. I actually think Florida's Victory would have been more resoudnig for the #2 spot had that happened. [/quote]

I am scared that I agree with you for once.

And to add to this, there would be less controversy considering the fact that most people are upset that Florida skipped over Michigan when Michigan hadn't even played.
lvnwrth

December 04, 2006 at 10:18PM View BBCode

Originally posted by Bones2484
I love how lvnwrth tries to weasel out of arguments by just saying there's no point to responding to USC fans. Especially considering the arguments were Florida vs Michigan and had nothing to do with USC.

Oh well, not like his opinions were ever worth reading anyways... we won't miss him in this thread, or any others.


More meaningless blather from a Trojan fan.
drunkengoat

December 04, 2006 at 10:20PM View BBCode

Next ratings rumble, both of you have berths slotted, and I can only hope you can take the heat when one of you crumbles in your head-to-head matchup!
Bones2484

December 04, 2006 at 10:51PM View BBCode

Originally posted by lvnwrth
More meaningless blather from a Trojan fan.


FuriousGiorge

December 04, 2006 at 10:55PM View BBCode

Get a room.
tm4559

December 05, 2006 at 12:16AM View BBCode

na
na
na
na
na
na
UCLA. sorry condoms.
lvnwrth

December 05, 2006 at 12:52AM View BBCode

Bones before UCLA game:




Bones following UCLA game:




[Edited on 12-5-2006 by lvnwrth]
tm4559

December 05, 2006 at 12:56AM View BBCode

i love the bruins, i truly do. next season, maybe USC will get beaten by real football teams. the great thing about the BCS is, it has now given us what we always used to before: a meaningless rose bowl (isn't it USC and Michigan). meanwhile, OSU plays Florida. that sounds like an authentic, bang up football game. where are they playing?
rkinslow19

December 05, 2006 at 02:10AM View BBCode

Originally posted by scaffdog
thier SCHEDULE is rated #2 in the country. His computer ranking used in the BCS has USC 4th behind OSU, Michigan, and Florida, in that order.


That's not the way I read it:

OSU 100.65
USC 94.12
Michigan 93.23
LSU 91.98
Louisville 91.80
FLorida 91.60

The scores are an average of his "ELO_CHESS" and "Predictor" ratings.
rkinslow19

December 05, 2006 at 02:11AM View BBCode

Originally posted by lvnwrth
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Originally posted by barterer2002
lvnwrth

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Your argument is that Michigan should get the rematch because there are no rules preventing a rematch.

I guess my first question is what are the rules since I thought the voters could vote for whomever they wish. If, as a voter, my opinion is that a conference champ is better than the runner up why is that wrong simply because the runner up almost won?


In lvnwrth's book, when two good teams play, losses don't count.


Another example of why its pointless to try to respond to USC fans. What a stupid, stupid statement. But then, consider the source.


lvnwrth, I don't know enough about you to judge your character, but when it comes to intelligence, you're a moron

[Edited on 12-5-2006 by rkinslow19]
scaffdog

December 05, 2006 at 05:43AM View BBCode

yes Kinsolow, but the Elo-chess rating is the one used by the BCS, read my post before you respond.

Pages: 1 2