2006 College Football - Page 53

SigKapSweetie · #**781** 12-04-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valkyrie

I'm not saying that Michigan is better than Ohio State. Michigan is better than Florida.

In what alternate universe?

shinerbock · #**782** 12-04-2006, 02:23 PM

As an Auburn alum/fan, I don't think we could beat Michigan with anything less than a struggle. I think that if we played well we could win, but we haven't done that lately.

Another note, I'm sick of the bitching about the Leak fumble. Everyone with any sort of intelligence realizes that his arm was moving forward, but he didn't throw the ball. He was obviously trying to bring it back in when it was knocked out. Theres no tuck rule. If you wanna change the rule, then fine, but its pretty apparent to see what happened. That aside, it was not the game deciding play. Not saying it couldn't have changed the outcome, but its not an Oklahoma situation where the game was decided on it.

xo_kathy · #**783** 12-04-2006, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SigKapSweetie

In what alternate universe?

Kirk "weird last name but I'm a hottie"-street on ESPN made an interesting point - If Florida is better than Michigan, why were they not above Michigan in the rankings for the greater part of the season?

He also said that if the UofM/OSU game had been played this weekend with the same outcome and the FL game the same outcome, he thinks the voters would have put Michigan into the championship. It's been 2 weeks since the UofM/OSU game so it was out of mind to a lot of people.

amycat412 · #**784** 12-04-2006, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Why should Florida get rewarded for losing to Auburn?

I'm not saying that Michigan is better than Ohio State. Michigan is better than Florida.

And for playing 1-AA teams in their non conference schedule.

I really wish BCS would outlaw that practice. You play non Div 1A teams, you are ineligible for BCS champ.

I don't think Michigan deserved another chance--they had it. But I am not sure Florida is the best team to go up against OSU either. My Trojans are certainly not the best team either.

macallan25 · #**785** 12-04-2006, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xo_kathy

Kirk "weird last name but I'm a hottie"-street on ESPN made an interesting point - If Florida is better than Michigan, why were they not above Michigan in the rankings for the greater part of the season?

He also said that if the UofM/OSU game had been played this weekend with the same outcome and the FL game the same outcome, he thinks the voters would have put Michigan into the championship. It's been 2 weeks since the UofM/OSU game so it was out of mind to a lot of people.

First of all...Kirk Herbstreet is a moron. Don't listen to him. Michigan played an easy/moderate as shit schedule and was aided by the fact that they beat Notre Dame when they were No. 2. Notre Dame is the most overrated team in college football.....but it didn't matter then. All Michigan had to do was keep winning......no matter who their fluke opponent of the week was. Florida played in the SEC.....against 4 solid top 10 teams.....and lost one of them largely in part to that leak fumble/no fumble.

As far as Michigan not playing for two weeks......MAKE THEM PLAY A CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP!!! Simple as that. If Michigan plays OSU again....in a conference championship.....and loses......then there is no argument.

macallan25 · #**786** 12-04-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amycat412

And for playing 1-AA teams in their non conference schedule.

I really wish BCS would outlaw that practice. You play non Div 1A teams, you are ineligible for BCS champ.

I don't think Michigan deserved another chance--they had it. But I am not sure Florida is the best team to go up against OSU either. My Trojans are certainly not the best team either.

Teams play Div 1AA opponents all the time....I don't think it is any different than playing a BS team from the MAC or the Sun Belt conference.

macallan25 · #**787** 12-04-2006, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Why should Florida get rewarded for losing to Auburn?

I'm not saying that Michigan is better than Ohio State. Michigan is better than Florida.

No team should get rewarded for losing.....however, teams that play in the toughest conference in the nation with a conference championship after the fact.........should absolutely be rewarded if they escape it with 1 loss to a top 10 team. Nevermind the fact that they beat 3 other top 10 teams and escaped Georgia (down year but still solid at 8-4) and South Carolina, who has that certain coach known as Steve Spurrier.

How do you justify Michigan being better than Florida? I'm actually interested to hear your analysis.

shinerbock · #**788** 12-04-2006, 03:37 PM

I think UF deserved to get in. However, say they beat OSU by 3, I won't really consider them the best team in college football. When an undefeated team from a respectable conference plays a one loss team, out of a couple one loss teams, I don't see how thats a legit game for the title. I have no doubt that UF, if they play really well, can win. That being said, I don't think UF has shown any indication that they're a top 3 team, much less number one.

macallan25 · #**789** 12-04-2006, 04:15 PM

I see your point.....and I think a playoff is the only way to decide. There will be controversy every year. I think last season was the exception....everything seemed to work out right.....but I can't see something like that happening again, especially now that they added a 5th BCS.

shinerbock · #**790** 12-04-2006, 04:59 PM

Yeah, a playoff is precisely what I'm saying we need. Its just that sometimes I think the BCS fails more than the polls and bowls system we used to have. Yeah, it worked last year, but this year I think we'd be better off just letting OSU play whoever, not for the title game, but just to stay atop the polls. Everyone else can battle it out for 2nd. I just don't UF will be THE legitimate champ if they beat OSU. A top team with several quality wins, sure. However, if that happens and Michigan goes out and dominates USC, we're back where we started.

macallan25 · #**791** 12-04-2006, 05:43 PM

true story.

starang21 · #**792** 12-04-2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Yeah, a playoff is precisely what I'm saying we need. Its just that sometimes I think the BCS fails more than the polls and bowls system we used to have. Yeah, it worked last year, but this year I think we'd be better off just letting OSU play whoever, not for the title game, but just to stay atop the polls. Everyone else can battle it out for 2nd. I just don't UF will be THE legitimate champ if they beat OSU. A top team with several quality wins, sure. However, if that happens and Michigan goes out and dominates USC, we're back where we started.

are you suggesting we get rid of all or most of the bowl games then?

macallan25 · #**793** 12-04-2006, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by starang21

are you suggesting we get rid of all or most of the bowl games then?

Why couldn't you make the bowl games the playoff games?

example:

Playoff Round 1:
Game 1: Cotton Bowl
Game 2: Holiday Bowl
Game 3: Gator Bowl

......as the playoffs get furhter along...you play in more prestigious bowl. Semifinals, Quarterfinals etc. could be played in the current BCS Bowls (Rose, Sugar, Orange, etc. )

shinerbock · #**794** 12-04-2006, 05:53 PM

No, not at all. I'm saying that under the old system, where the pairings weren't necc 1 vs. 2, the situation would be different. OSU would probably play USC in the Rose, and thus its a championship game for OSU, but not for USC. USC winning doesn't mean their the national champs, just like I don't think UF or Michigan winning would really crown them the champs. I mean, say UF wins, some people might think its legitimate (no slight to UF, its just a bad system), but I wouldn't assume they're the best team in college football. At least under the pre-BCS polls and bowls system, we could get a split title. Note, I'm not in favor of splits, but I'd prefer a split title over shutting out a completely deserving team, and sending them home with nothing. I think if UF beats OSU (but not overly impressively) and Michigan takes it to USC, the AP should put Michigan at #1. Of course, this is all a result of my bias over AU getting hosed in 2004. I would never assume we were better or more deserving than USC, but to send a 13-0 SEC team home with nothing was ridiculous, and I don't want to see it happen to any other major conference team.

starang21 · #**795** 12-04-2006, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

No, not at all. I'm saying that under the old system, where the pairings weren't necc 1 vs. 2, the situation would be different. OSU would probably play USC in the Rose, and thus its a championship game for OSU, but not for USC. USC winning doesn't mean their the national champs, just like I don't think UF or Michigan winning would really crown them the champs. I mean, say UF wins, some people might think its legitimate (no slight to UF, its just a bad system), but I wouldn't assume they're the best team in college football. At least under the pre-BCS polls and bowls system, we could get a split title. Note, I'm not in favor of splits, but I'd prefer a split title over shutting out a completely deserving team, and sending them home with nothing. I think if UF beats OSU (but not overly impressively) and Michigan takes it to USC, the AP should put Michigan at #1. Of course, this is all a result of my bias over AU getting hosed in 2004. I would never assume we were better or more deserving than USC, but to send a 13-0 SEC team home with nothing was ridiculous, and I don't want to see it happen to any other major conference team.

but then how would you do it? let's say you have the sugar bowl and the citrus bowl as semi-finals. then the rose bowl as the final. everything on a neutral field. while the bowls themselves will pay for travel expenses for the teams....what about the fans? say you're from florida and you want to watch your team in AZ to win the semifinal. are you gonna leave that next week to travel to california to watch them again?