October 31, 200619 yr Maybe. What I don't understand is this: if they are clearly the best two teams, barring a white-washing by one team or the other, why shouldn't they play on 1/8/07 for the whole ball of wax? I'll assume that's a rhetorical question.
October 31, 200619 yr Maybe. What I don't understand is this: if they are clearly the best two teams, barring a white-washing by one team or the other, why shouldn't they play on 1/8/07 for the whole ball of wax? I don't think you can say for sure they are clearly the best teams after they play each other. If Louisville is undefeated at the end of the year, say, and OSU beats Michigan, you can't assume Louisville (undefeated) could not beat OSU just because Michigan didn't. Said another way, you can't assume Michigan with one loss is still better the an undefeated Louisville. Put yet another way, you can't assume Michigan should be rated above Louisville at that point, or in fact would be.
October 31, 200619 yr Your logic/thinking that UM "had their chance" so they don't deserve to be #2 is assinine. Fans want the two best teams to play in the championship. The number of losses on their schedule is irrelevant to the intelligent fan. Fans want the team holding the big trophy to have EARNED it by proving they are worthy of the crown. Winning all of your games in and of itself does not prove anything other than you're better than the teams you've played. Should one of the teams from the BEAST make the championship game, we'll see a new formula for future championships. "We beat who was on our schedule" is not enough if your conference stinks. You had better make up for your poor conference with a strong OOC schedule which NONE of the 3 BEAST teams have done. I agree with you. If we are going to crown a NCAA champ based on beating whoever is one the schedule, this could benefit Notre Dame greatly. Without any conference affiliation, they could schedule teams from BCS conferences that would be just good enough to allow them to make the championship game if undefeated. There would be no incentive to schedule tough opponets. Notre Dame would never do this, they will always play USC, and other tough opponets. I could do with less service academies but their is some traditon with ND / Army and they will always be in debt to Navy. Notre Dame schedule is made pretty far in advance so its hard to predict that some of their traditional opponets would be down, but I've probably rambled to where this post makes no sense. Anyway what I'm trying to say is that going undefeated in itself should not be enough to play for the championship.
October 31, 200619 yr I don't think you can say for sure they are clearly the best teams after they play each other. If Louisville is undefeated at the end of the year, say, and OSU beats Michigan, you can't assume Louisville (undefeated) could not beat OSU just because Michigan didn't. Said another way, you can't assume Michigan with one loss is still better the an undefeated Louisville. Put yet another way, you can't assume Michigan should be rated above Louisville at that point, or in fact would be. You and I seem to come to trouble in the same place. Our problem is that two teams with almost no basis with which to compare them to anyone else are "supposed" to be the two best teams in the country. Computers are fine but they only take you so far. My problem doesn't lie in the potential of the UM/OSU matchup but that it should come down to that at all. Could it happen? Absolutely. Will I be furious about it? You bet. Can you even imagine this discussion in any other sport? Probably not because only college football is this absurd.
October 31, 200619 yr Can you even imagine this discussion in any other sport? You mean like when Oklahoma and Kansas played for the Big 12 title (maybe Big 8 at the time) and then again for the National Title? Nope, can't imagine it. Were there a few games in between, sure, but ultimately, it's the same thing. For the record, you won't find anyone that despises both OSU and Michigan more than I do, however, if they're the two best than I'm okay with them playing for all of the marbles...in a rematch.
October 31, 200619 yr Your logic/thinking that UM "had their chance" so they don't deserve to be #2 is assinine. Fans want the two best teams to play in the championship. http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/ivp/index?id=2643192 ESPN analyst has the same opinion as RockPride...that the winner of the UL/WV game (if they stay undefeated) will play the winner of the OSU/UM game for the National Championship....
October 31, 200619 yr http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/ivp/index?id=2643192 ESPN analyst has the same opinion as RockPride...that the winner of the UL/WV game (if they stay undefeated) will play the winner of the OSU/UM game for the National Championship.... Which tells me what exactly? That the ESPN analyst also is assinine in his/her thinking? When the concept of the BCS was set up , what was the impetus? Exactly - to get the two BEST teams to play a championship game. It did not set it up to get teams with the best record. I have yet to hear a UL fan suggest that should they be undefeated that they should be in the title game because they are one of the top 2 teams. All I'm hearing is "because we're undefeated."
October 31, 200619 yr I don't think you can say for sure they are clearly the best teams after they play each other. If Louisville is undefeated at the end of the year, say, and OSU beats Michigan, you can't assume Louisville (undefeated) could not beat OSU just because Michigan didn't. Said another way, you can't assume Michigan with one loss is still better the an undefeated Louisville. Put yet another way, you can't assume Michigan should be rated above Louisville at that point, or in fact would be. You are correct in one regard: you cannot assume anything. By your logic, all undefeated teams should be ranked in the #1 spot regardless of their ability to compete. I would think you would agree that the fact that Boise State (undefeated) is no where near the #1 spot would show that while you cannot assume anything, you can certainly use your God-given brain to make a logical choice.
October 31, 200619 yr The BCS began in 1997 For the record, I have just completed a massive study of the BCS and until someone proves me wrong and I guess its possible, I have concluded that the BCS as we know it, the True BCS formed in 1997 by the 6 major conferences & ND has never, ever chosen a once beaten BCS league champion over an undefeated BCS league champion to compete for the National Title.
October 31, 200619 yr tO$U and Michigan are the best two teams in the country. That's just the way it is. The rematch is looking more and more likely by the week and as long as their is no blowout, regardless which way it goes, I think we see that happen. Personally, I think if that were to happen the BCS would finally have gotten things right.....The goal of the system is to pit the two best teams against one another for the National Title.
October 31, 200619 yr Question for UofL fans: What has UofL done that Boise State hasn't??? I mean neither have played a good team yet. UofL's best win is over a bad Miami(FL) team. Boise State's is over an Oregon State team that just took down USC. Personally, I don't think there's much of a difference.....
October 31, 200619 yr Question for UofL fans: What has UofL done that Boise State hasn't??? I mean neither have played a good team yet. UofL's best win is over a bad Miami(FL) team. Boise State's is over an Oregon State team that just took down USC. Personally, I don't think there's much of a difference..... Right now no, but I think the arguements being made by the UL fans is that UL will be in the NC if they finish undefeated which means that they would beat WVU and SUNJ which would obviously give them a leg up on Boise State's body of work.
October 31, 200619 yr I have yet to hear a UL fan suggest that should they be undefeated that they should be in the title game because they are one of the top 2 teams. All I'm hearing is "because we're undefeated."If UofL runs through the rest of the schedule, which BTW is VERY formidable, they will have proven to be the one of the top two teams.
October 31, 200619 yr Question for UofL fans: What has UofL done that Boise State hasn't??? I mean neither have played a good team yet. UofL's best win is over a bad Miami(FL) team. Boise State's is over an Oregon State team that just took down USC. Personally, I don't think there's much of a difference..... If UL wins out, they will have beaten a Top 5 WVU, and an undefeated and Top 25 Rutgers on the road...BSU will not be able to say the same at the end of the season. ...Not to mention, UL will have done all this without their Heisman candidate #1 running back.
October 31, 200619 yr If UofL runs through the rest of the schedule, which BTW is VERY formidable, they will have proven to be the one of the top two teams. I just don't understand how they would be better than a one loss Florida or Michigan.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.