Wojo says UM got jobbed

[OldRaider22]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2685195

 

Good read, personally, I agree with him. I was raised to never, ever root for the Ohio St. buckeyes under any circumstances. And I never have, and probably never will again. But when the Buckeyes play the "mighty":rolleyes: Florida gators from the "mighty" SEC:rolleyes: I'll be the biggest Buckeye fan around. One thing in the article that I had been thinking for some time was pointed out. That UM was essentially penalized, not once, but twice for losing its last game of the year. This is why the BCS is terrible. It discourages historic matchups between two storied programs in favor of "alternating" schedules like the SEC and Big 12. Is that what it's come to? A few weeks ago, it was USC has played such a tough schedule, but if it weren't for that there would be a UM/OSU rematch. The general consensus was pretty much that UF shouldn't/didn't have a shot. How UF wins against a terrible FSU squad, and a team that got drilled by USC are convincing enough to move them that far up, I'll never know. Also, I found it particularly interesting that Vandy would suggest that UM was a better team......

 

 

And before you ask, yes I have a basket full of sour grapes, and all of the SEC can come out and rejoice and laugh at my rage. Just fully expect the I told you so speech over, and over, and over, on or about January 8th.........:flame: :flame: :madman: :madman:

 

The BCS got it wrong a few years ago by leaving Auburn out. They got it wrong when USC was left out in favor of Oklahoma in 2003. And yet once again, we have to watch two teams that are not the best 2 in the country play for the national title. My question is, how is this any different than it was prior to 1997? Who here will feel right about this if/when Florida gets beat handily?

[NEERFAN]

I have no problem with UF in the championship game, they lost one game and played the tougher schedule, plus I'd hate to hear TO$U fans after a loss to the Rines.

[OldRaider22]

I have no problem with UF in the championship game, they lost one game and played the tougher schedule, plus I'd hate to hear TO$U fans after a loss to the Rines.

I agree with the last part. Tougher schedule is relative. UM played the #3 SOS in the country, UF was #1. Almost as close as you can get to a draw there. UM lost one game too you know, to some team called OSU, on the road, by 3 points.........

 

Run it up Jim, leave no doubt!

[gametime]

33 of 62 Coaches moved Michigan to #3. That's what got Florida in...

[The Golfer]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2685195

 

Good read, personally, I agree with him. I was raised to never, ever root for the Ohio St. buckeyes under any circumstances. And I never have, and probably never will again. But when the Buckeyes play the "mighty":rolleyes: Florida gators from the "mighty" SEC:rolleyes: I'll be the biggest Buckeye fan around. One thing in the article that I had been thinking for some time was pointed out. That UM was essentially penalized, not once, but twice for losing its last game of the year. This is why the BCS is terrible. It discourages historic matchups between two storied programs in favor of "alternating" schedules like the SEC and Big 12. Is that what it's come to? A few weeks ago, it was USC has played such a tough schedule, but if it weren't for that there would be a UM/OSU rematch. The general consensus was pretty much that UF shouldn't/didn't have a shot. How UF wins against a terrible FSU squad, and a team that got drilled by USC are convincing enough to move them that far up, I'll never know. Also, I found it particularly interesting that Vandy would suggest that UM was a better team......

 

 

And before you ask, yes I have a basket full of sour grapes, and all of the SEC can come out and rejoice and laugh at my rage. Just fully expect the I told you so speech over, and over, and over, on or about January 8th.........:flame: :flame: :madman: :madman:

 

The BCS got it wrong a few years ago by leaving Auburn out. They got it wrong when USC was left out in favor of Oklahoma in 2003. And yet once again, we have to watch two teams that are not the best 2 in the country play for the national title. My question is, how is this any different than it was prior to 1997? Who here will feel right about this if/when Florida gets beat handily?

 

 

Michigan is a great team but here is why I think Florida earned it over Michigan.

 

I like to think what if Michigan played Florida's schedule and Florida were to play Michigans schedule what would have happend.

 

From Florida playing Michigans schedule I think Florida would have the exact same record. They would have beaten Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and lost in a close game to Ohio State at OSU.

 

From Michigan playing Florida's schedule I honestly think that Michigan would have lost two games somewhere. My bet is they would have lost to LSU who is as good as anyone in the country and one other SEC team.

 

If you are comparing a team that didn't win their conference to a team that did win their conference (with teams who have the same amount of losses) the team with no conference title has the burden of having to do something extra to leap frog or hold on to the #2 spot over the conference winning team. Michigan beating Notre Dame bad is not enough for me because Notre Dame is about a top 20 team in the Nation at best.

 

I don't like the idea that because Michigan played Ohio State close they get another shot.

 

I would ask the question "how many points can Ohio State beat Michigan by and still let Michigan play for the national title?" It's a stupid question but that is basically the truth. If OSU beat Michigan by 17 we would not have this argument, but in a close game it's okay. I don't like that idea.

[HHSballer19]

Michigan would clearly have provided a better matchup, but I think the reason they aren't playing is because a lot of people are saying... "Well, they had their shot."

[LRCW]

There will be crying every year, and most of the time it's justified, until they finally do the right thing, and have at least an 8 team playoff.

[The Golfer]

There will be crying every year, and most of the time it's justified, until they finally do the right thing, and have at least an 8 team playoff.

 

I agree 100% with that.

[OldRaider22]

Michigan is a great team but here is why I think Florida earned it over Michigan.

 

I like to think what if Michigan played Florida's schedule and Florida were to play Michigans schedule what would have happend.

 

From Florida playing Michigans schedule I think Florida would have the exact same record. They would have beaten Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and lost in a close game to Ohio State at OSU.

 

From Michigan playing Florida's schedule I honestly think that Michigan would have lost two games somewhere. My bet is they would have lost to LSU who is as good as anyone in the country and one other SEC team.

 

If you are comparing a team that didn't win their conference to a team that did win their conference (with teams who have the same amount of losses) the team with no conference title has the burden of having to do something extra to leap frog or hold on to the #2 spot over the conference winning team. Michigan beating Notre Dame bad is not enough for me because Notre Dame is about a top 20 team in the Nation at best.

 

I don't like the idea that because Michigan played Ohio State close they get another shot.

 

I would ask the question "how many points can Ohio State beat Michigan by and still let Michigan play for the national title?" It's a stupid question but that is basically the truth. If OSU beat Michigan by 17 we would not have this argument, but in a close game it's okay. I don't like that idea.

I'll make my case now, as if everyone hadn't heard it already.

 

Nowhere in the BCS is there a clause, stipulation, requirement, etc. about conference championships, the title game, or BCS bowls. Basically what you are telling me is that NEVER can the 2 best teams in the country be from the same conference. I say hogwash. If there is no rule in place, you cannot penalize a team. We'll see how good that "conference title" of UF looks after the bowl season. My personal feeling is that Wisc. will give Arkansas everything they want.

 

You say that UM should have to leap frog UF because they didn't win their conference? That's funny, because Michigan has been the CLEAR #2 team in the country since around week 7-8. IMO, it falls the other way. How is it that a team whose only blemish is to the one team that everyone agrees should be #1 has something to prove to anyone?

 

Right now, this is mind numbing. We could go round and round. After the bowl season, we'll have some definitive truths. You ask about how many points does UM have to lose by? I have a question as well. If the one team in the SEC that has played both UF and UM(Vandy) doesn't believe that UF is better than UM, what more do you need?

[OldRaider22]

There will be crying every year, and most of the time it's justified, until they finally do the right thing, and have at least an 8 team playoff.

:thumb: I think this will ultimately be the straw that broke the camels back. When a program like UM get's slighted, they tend not to let it go unnoticed. This would be 3 times in the last 9 that the title game hasn't featured the 2 best teams. Anyone remember how the 1st 2 turned out? I love the bowls, and I'm as big of a traditionalist as you'll find, but if this is the alternative, I want a playoff. The BCS is worse than the old AP/coaches poll championship IMO.

[UKPat02]

Michigan would clearly have provided a better matchup, but I think the reason they aren't playing is because a lot of people are saying... "Well, they had their shot."

 

 

That's reason enough for me.

[The Golfer]

I'll make my case now, as if everyone hadn't heard it already.

 

Nowhere in the BCS is there a clause, stipulation, requirement, etc. about conference championships, the title game, or BCS bowls. Basically what you are telling me is that NEVER can the 2 best teams in the country be from the same conference. I say hogwash. If there is no rule in place, you cannot penalize a team. We'll see how good that "conference title" of UF looks after the bowl season. My personal feeling is that Wisc. will give Arkansas everything they want.

 

You say that UM should have to leap frog UF because they didn't win their conference? That's funny, because Michigan has been the CLEAR #2 team in the country since around week 7-8. IMO, it falls the other way. How is it that a team whose only blemish is to the one team that everyone agrees should be #1 has something to prove to anyone?

 

Right now, this is mind numbing. We could go round and round. After the bowl season, we'll have some definitive truths. You ask about how many points does UM have to lose by? I have a question as well. If the one team in the SEC that has played both UF and UM(Vandy) doesn't believe that UF is better than UM, what more do you need?

 

 

I think there is a misunderstanding sometimes with the BCS as if it has to get the two best teams on the field. That is not the case. LSU could be the best team in the nation right now but they screwed up in the season and has 2 losses and didn't get here. USC with Carson Palmer I think could have beaten Ohio State when OSU won the national title but USC screwed up in the season and didn't get to the title game.

 

It's not really who we think the two best teams are but who earned the right. If Louisville would have beaten Rutgers they would have earned the right but they are not the second best team in the nation whether they beat Rutgers or not.

 

Getting into we beat this team by more than you did is not a way to solve who is better.

 

To be honest with you I have no pitty for College Football teams because they can fix this system but they choose not to so you brought these problems on yourself.

 

Put in a playoff like everyother sport in America and end this Bull Crap System or the BCS.

[gametime]

Michigan would clearly have provided a better matchup, but I think the reason they aren't playing is because a lot of people are saying... "Well, they had their shot."

If that's in the unwritten rules, I wish they add it in to the real ones. 33 of 62 coaches changed their mind on the two because of the sloppy W over Arkansas? Shenanigans (bugatti 2002)...

[UKPat02]

If that's in the unwritten rules, I wish they add it in to the real ones. 33 of 62 coaches changed their mind on the two because of the sloppy W over Arkansas? Shenanigans (bugatti 2002)...

 

Sloppy or not, it was a win over a Top 10 team. No one has played a tougher schedule.

[Kick]

Oldraider 22

 

Personally I don't like the current system either but I think it is here to stay for awhile. But it is not 1 or 2 big wigs sitting in their office making these decisions. Several polls along with strength of schedule factored in all of which when computed obviously shows there are more people in the country, coaches included that disagree with what your opinion is rather than agree with it. It's what we have which is better than what we had 10-15 years ago so we must live with it. And IMO I think the game will be a good one.