COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2007

[Fred T. Jane]

All four of their road games were against top-10 ranked SEC teams (#3 Auburn, #5 Florida, #8 Tennessee, #5 Arkansas). Splitting those four is a pretty good accomplishment.

Pretty good sounds like a fit for the Cotton Bowl, not a BCS bowl. They didn't even win their division, so why should they garner BCS interest? Frankly, Louisville gets my nod for an at-large before the Baton Rouge Ag School.

[OB33]

I understand your points epiphanic, but I think that Michigan and Ohio state are 1 and 2. I think if it was at the Big House, Michigan would have won in a close game also. That is why I would like to see them play at a neutral field. People say that because Michigan already lost to Ohio State, they already proved Ohio State is better, so give someone else a chance. My problem is they say Michigan lost their chance. Why does Michigan only get a chance at the shoe, but someone else will get a chance at a neutral field. I also have a problem with people talking about how hard USC's schedule was, but Florida's wasn't much easier, they actually might have had a harder schedule. I am getting sick of USC getting the benefit of the doubt just because they are USC.

I would like a playoff, but even if there are only 8 teams, that takes away 2 weeks of the regular season. Also, as someone mentioned before, the argument would just change from who's #2 to who's #8. I agree that the BCS is screwed up, but I am not sure exactly how they should go about changing it.

I agree with you that Ohio State and Michigan are the top two teams in the nation, and to be brutally honest with you, I think UCLA is going to pull the upset Saturday. I also agree that it isn't fair that Michigan had to play for a right to title game on the road. My counter to that is that it isn't fair that Ohio State has to beat Michigan twice in order to be #1 while Michigan would only have to win one out of two to be #1. I think having them play a best of 3 would be the only way to truly rectify the situation, but I think we all know that will never happen. Ultimately, what it comes down to is that the BCS is only effective when the top two teams are undefeated and everyone else has at least one loss. And while a playoff would create controversy between number #8 and #9 I think it would be in the same vein as the arguments between teams on the bubble come March Madness time. There may be a deserving team that doesn't get in, but it's not like they were going to have a realistic shot at winning it all anyway.

I could argue why I think Ohio State would win at the Big House, but I'm pretty sure we'd never find middle ground in that argument.

[Epiphanic]

I think OB33 hit it right on the head with his observation why a rematch is undesirable. Sure it may be unfair for Michigan to have to go to Columbus to have a shot, but if I may be permitted a cliche, champions will win anywhere." It's also unfair to ask that Ohio State has to beat Michigan twice to be considered number one. So I believe OB33's observation is a great example why Michigan shouldn't be there.

PtnD, I too am sick that USC gets the benefit of the doubt because of the name on the jersey. But it doesn't start and stop with them. All the BCS power schools command that kind of respect and it's not fair to the smaller schools in those conferences (i.e. Rutgers) or power schools not in the BCS conferences (i.e. Boise State).

To me the BCS system is a nice concept, but impossible to execute fairly. As OB33 pointed out it really only works when there is no doubt with the number #1 and #2 teams (last years USC/Texas). But if you think about it the BCS doesn't really get us to that spot anyway. The only thing it does is contractually obligate those two teams to play each other. In my opinion the NCAA needs to decide if they want a true national champion year after year. If they do, a playoff is in order. If that doesn't matter to them and split championships are possible, we can end this debate because the BCS allows for that to happen.

I've heard a playoff system would do the following. There are apparently 15 "major" bowls during the bowl weeks. That would allow a 16 team playoff taking the month of December and concluding on New Year's Day. 16 teams would be divided among the 11 division 1A conference champions and the remaining 5 would be at-larges. You could use the BCS system to determine the 5 at-larges. I'm pretty sure that would include everyone with a reasonable claim to fight for the national championship.

The drawback (if any) is the length of the schedule. The national championship game will have two teams that will have played 15-16 games (11-12 regular season plus 4 playoff games). The question is can these kinds handle that long of a schedule? I'm not sure, but I think they could given the right coaching philosophies.

[infrared41]

I think if it was at the Big House, Michigan would have won in a close game also. That is why I would like to see them play at a neutral field.

You're all about the "ifs" aren't you? OB33 hit it on the head. Why do you feel it's OK if Ohio State has to beat Michigan twice to win it all but you think Michigan deserves in essence a mulligan at a neutral field? Would you feel the same way if Ohio State had lost the game?

My problem is they say Michigan lost their chance.

No one is "saying" it. It's a fact. Michigan lost the game and their only legitimate chance at going to Glendale. Period. Game, set, match. Try winning next year. It makes it much easier to make your case.

Why does Michigan only get a chance at the shoe

Because they play in the Big 10 and that's how the schedule works. How "unfair" will it be when Ohio State has to go to Ann Arbor for a possible shot at the title next year?

Your team lost the game, USC played a tougher schedule and won their conference. Yes USC lost to an unranked team but in the final analysis The Trojans also played Arkansas and Nebraska while your Wolverines feasted on MAC schools and patsies and barely at that (see Ball State.)

[Squeaks4]

I think if it was at the Big House, Michigan would have won in a close game also. That is why I would like to see them play at a neutral field.

You're all about the "ifs" aren't you? OB33 hit it on the head. Why do you feel it's OK if Ohio State has to beat Michigan twice to win it all but you think Michigan deserves in essence a mulligan at a neutral field? Would you feel the same way if Ohio State had lost the game?

My problem is they say Michigan lost their chance.

No one is "saying" it. It's a fact. Michigan lost the game and their only legitimate chance at going to Glendale. Period. Game, set, match. Try winning next year. It makes it much easier to make your case.

Why does Michigan only get a chance at the shoe

Because they play in the Big 10 and that's how the schedule works. How "unfair" will it be when Ohio State has to go to Ann Arbor for a possible shot at the title next year?

Your team lost the game, USC played a tougher schedule and won their conference. Yes USC lost to an unranked team but in the final analysis The Trojans also played Arkansas and Nebraska while your Wolverines feasted on MAC schools and patsies and barely at that (see Ball State.)

I am sure that if Ohio had lost that game you would be saying the same things.

[infrared41]

I am sure that if Ohio had lost that game you would be saying the same things.

Believe it or not, I can assure you that I wouldn't. If by some miracle Michigan manages to back into the title game and beat Ohio State I won't say anything other than congratulations. That's why hearing Michigan fans whine about this is so frustrating to me. I can't speak for all Ohio State fans but I promise you if the shoe had been on the other foot I would have made the same arguments against Ohio State getting a rematch. That's the God's honest truth.

[NJTank]

Before he died Bo Schembechler said there should no be a rematch. There should not be a rematch

[Jigga]

UCLA 13, USC 9. Oops.

Looks like Michigan will get their rematch.

[Epiphanic]

I'm excited. I'm hoping that Arkansas can comeback and win against Florida. If that happens and Rutgers wins (their up 7-0 now), I'll be one happy camper.

OSU - Rutgers in the National Title! (What it should be)

[DEAD!]

I will be outraged if Boise State is not in the National Championship game!!!

[NJTank]

So you will make Noise is Boise is not in the BCS Game

[Squeaks4]

So you will make Noise is Boise is not in the BCS Game

Boise will be coming to Glendale...just a few days too earlier

[FiddySicks]

[NJTank]

Wow you hate the Gators why?

[FiddySicks]

Wow you hate the Gators why?

Just raised that way. Its in my blood. I bleed Tennessee Orange and :censored: Florida blue.

[Fred T. Jane]

Q: What has 200,000 feet, yet has 6 teeth?

A: the crowd at Neyland Stadium

BTW, here's to the 40,000+ Louisiana Agricultural Institute fans who reserved Rose Bowl tickets...

[OB33]

2 reasons why the BCS would put Florida ahead of Michigan for the title game. (NOTE: I said would, not should. Not that I'm saying they shouldn't though, I'm just saying if they did end up playing in Glendale here's would be why.)

1) The Rose Bowl would get their beloved Big-Ten Pac-10 matchup for only the second time in six years with USC playing Michigan if the Gators were in the title game.

2) Do you want to deal with the SEC if they get shortchanged on a #1 vs. #2 matchup again? If the Gators is snubbed they'll point to this and Auburn getting snubbed in '04 and play the nobody likes us card. Not to mention Urban Meyer also feeling like he got shortchanged by the system again.

I think that more than anything will weigh on who goes bowling where this year. Not saying that it's right, not saying that it's fair, but if Florida ends up going I think it will have more to do with that than then strength of schedule, quality victories, etc.

[Fred T. Jane]

Louisville-Wake Forest in the Orange Bowl? Wir werden sehen...

[HedleyLamarr]

So here are your champions:

Big Ten: Ohio State

ACC: Wake Forest

SEC: Florida

Pac-10: Southern Cal

Big East: Louisville

Big XII: Oklahoma (assuming they hold on)

If Michigan is #2:

BCS NC: Ohio State-Michigan

Orange: Wake Forest-Louisville

Sugar: Florida-Notre Dame

Fiesta: Oklahoma-Boise State

Rose: Southern Cal-LSU

If Florida is #2:

BCS NC: Ohio State-Florida

Orange: Wake Forest-Louisville

Sugar: LSU-Notre Dame

Fiesta: Oklahoma-Boise State

Rose: Southern Cal-Michigan

[Epiphanic]

We'll I'm bummed out that Rutgers lost. Florida beat Arkansas, so my "ideal" wouldn't have been that convincing anyway. Of the "contenders" I hope Florida gets the nod because they deserve it with their conference championship. Although I would prefer Boise State.