MAC or D1AA? I know you don't want to go here...

 

BAD MAC...all MAC is not created equal...Ball State is awful...

BAD MAC...all MAC is not created equal...Ball State is awful...

And UM should take heat for how they played in that game. No argument here. They started looking ahead, and it almost got them. But vote them down THEN. That didn't happen. Same as when they stayed #2 after the loss...

I don't have a problem with Florida in the title game. I have a problem with how the human polls went down. Check the computer rankings. Tied...

 

If the computer had them tied, the human vote broke the tie. The coaches and the press voted UF #2, breaking the tie. Did you ever think that maybe they know a little more about who's better than you, an obviously biased UM fan?

Michigan lost by 3 at OSU. Odds makers say home field advantage is worth 3-4 points.

 

So all of the sudden odds matter?

 

:walk:

There was a report on the radio this morning that Michigan is considering a game after the OSU game so that they are not off the radar screen for 2-3 weeks.

 

Also, Florida kept winning games while the last thought of Michigan was a loss. The college football system has always been if you are going to lose, lose early. A late loss hurts you.

Florida had less yards and more turnovers than Georgia and Vandy. Do you really want to dance this dance???

 

The difference being that they won. Which is.. well.. a pretty big difference.

Like I've said. If that were the rule, so be it. Since it's not, I have a major problem with what went down. I don't like a situation that makes rules on the fly without letting us in on it...

I would hazard a guess if that was Steve Spurrier in your avatar, you wouldn't be so venomous on your view and might even be arguing the other way.

I hate those that argue without knowing the rules of the game...

 

Do you have the entire rulebook memorized? Thats what I thought. Get off it.

MAC or D1AA? I know you don't want to go here...

 

Michigan beat Ball State by a WHOPPING 8 points (34-26). Just for reference, Florida beat LSU, and Arkansas by more.

 

Anyone remember the margin for the Florida vs. Western Carolina?

 

SIXTY-TWO points. 62-0

 

 

Now when you that to the fact that even with West Carolina on the schedule they STILL had the undisputed toughest schedule in football, what do you say? Florida didn't schedule tough enough??

To sum this up, Michigan fans think the voters got it right when they voted Michigan number 2 after a loss, but now they've got it all wrong. Once again we're aware that Michigan fans think they got a raw deal. It will not change this year so can we move on?

Florida had less yards and more turnovers than Georgia and Vandy. Do you really want to dance this dance???

 

Sure. I believe UF won those games.

 

I do see your point, GT; that being the mystery behind why UF leapfrogged UM in the final coaches poll. I think several factors were in play.

 

The last week of the regular season, UF won a conference championship - arguably the toughest conference championship - against a ranked opponent and won. Michigan was idle. I'm guessing that a few of the voters were swayed by that result. Was UM "penalized" by not participating in a conference championship? Probably, but only if they would have won it, and there's certainly no guarantee of that.

 

OSU and UM have already played. OSU rolled up over 500 yards of offense in that game. OSU was negative 3 in the turnover department and still won a game where the game wasn't as close as the final score indicated. I'm guessing that there are a lot of folks of the mindset that "UM had their chance - if there's another worthy opponent, let's let them have theirs."

 

I've heard the theory that OSU "shouldn't be penalized" by having to play the same team twice in a row. I'm not saying I buy it - in fact, if UM WAS A CLEAR NUMBER 2, I wouldn't buy it at all, but a few folks might think that way.

 

Florida has a 12-1 record versus the most difficult schedule in the nation. Yes, Michigan's schedule was #3; but last time I checked, 1 outranks 3.

 

And even considering all of the above, I do share your curiosity as to how the final coaches poll ended up the way it did. One coach voted OSU #1, UM #2, and Wisconsin #3, for crying out loud. That is one reason why the BCS is fundamentally flawed, and I would wholehearedly endorse an 8-team playoff. Playoffs are in place for every level of college football except 1A; so no one can tell me that it can't be done.

I thought you were over Michigan not getting in the champioship game? :sssh:

MCPAPA, your assumption is that a 8-team playoff would not have the flaws that you accuse the BCS of having. And that has been posted many times this season alone in showing it would.

 

Any playoff will have a conference tie-in. With the 6 BCS conferences, Wake Forest and Oklahoma are in. With Michigan obviously taking one of the two at-large bids, than you have to choose one team from......Boise State, #4 ranked LSU or Wisconsin.

 

If Boise State did not make it in on a playoff (meaning you are now leaving out the #4 ranked team in the nation, LSU), the mid-majors should get together and sue because they are being excluded when they are undefeated.

MCPAPA, your assumption is that a 8-team playoff would not have the flaws that you accuse the BCS of having. And that has been posted many times this season alone in showing it would.

 

Any playoff will have a conference tie-in. With the 6 BCS conferences, Wake Forest and Oklahoma are in. With Michigan obviously taking one of the two at-large bids, than you have to choose one team from......Boise State, #4 ranked LSU or Wisconsin.

 

If Boise State did not make it in on a playoff (meaning you are now leaving out the #4 ranked team in the nation, LSU), the mid-majors should get together and sue because they are being excluded when they are undefeated.

 

Even if there were an 8 team playoff someone would cry about not getting in that, just like you mentioned. If you win all of your games and you're from a major conference you should get to play for the title. If you lose one you take the risk of getting BCS'd out of the title game.

MCPAPA, your assumption is that a 8-team playoff would not have the flaws that you accuse the BCS of having. And that has been posted many times this season alone in showing it would.

 

Any playoff will have a conference tie-in. With the 6 BCS conferences, Wake Forest and Oklahoma are in. With Michigan obviously taking one of the two at-large bids, than you have to choose one team from......Boise State, #4 ranked LSU or Wisconsin.

 

If Boise State did not make it in on a playoff (meaning you are now leaving out the #4 ranked team in the nation, LSU), the mid-majors should get together and sue because they are being excluded when they are undefeated.

 

I agree, and thats why I'm all for a 12 team playoff. Top 4 teams get buys the first week. You could do a 16 team in the same time, but I don't want to punish the teams who've proven they're good by letting lots of teams have a shot at them.