tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post116404347208563319..comments2024-03-17T03:18:56.070-04:00Comments on Dan Shanoff: BCS: Ohio State vs.:USC? Florida? (Hint: NOT Michigan)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger105125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-53007151411170161482007-04-01T11:21:00.000-04:002007-04-01T11:21:00.000-04:00you need an editor. poorly written buddy, couldn'...you need an editor. poorly written buddy, couldn't get past the first sentence. wouldn't HAVE, not of. . .Andreahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00726545233032051208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164115027723563262006-11-21T08:17:00.000-05:002006-11-21T08:17:00.000-05:00@JohnCan I please have some of the crack you are s...@John<BR/><BR/>Can I please have some of the crack you are smoking?? OSU is not CLEARLY the #1 team?? The game against UM was not even as close as the score indicated. UM won the TO battle 3-0!! 2 of those were unforced TO's and the only thing UM did was fall on the ball. The 3rd was a tipped int that was caused by 2 UM players ALL OVER Robiskie. How there wasnt PI on that play I will never know. The TO's led to 10 Mich points. Those are the FACTS.<BR/><BR/>Then later in the 4th Qtr on 4th and 17 the "phantom" PI on OSU to give UM a 1st down. If there is no PI on Robiske there sure as hell not PI on that play. That sustained the UM drive and they go down and score. OSU was playing prevent D so they could get the ball back and run out the clock. <BR/><BR/>So all of that combined is AT LEAST 17 points for UM. That isnt even taking into account that OSU most likely would have scored when they had those TO's. I wont even give OSU any points but we all know they would have scored and scored again on the sorry UM defense. UM wasnt stopping anyone that day. Can you say 503 total yards?? <BR/><BR/>The game wasnt even as close as the final score indicated. If you think it was then you really really dont know football at all. Im surprised more people dont realize how much in control of this game OSU was. UM does not deserve a rematch. END.OF.STORY.<BR/><BR/>You will have to wait until next year to see if LLLLLoyd can be owned again by Tressel.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164076885426925392006-11-20T21:41:00.000-05:002006-11-20T21:41:00.000-05:00I think the manningham's are hiding.I think the manningham's are hiding.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164069645717860482006-11-20T19:40:00.000-05:002006-11-20T19:40:00.000-05:00That 1997 Rose Bowl was one heck of a good game. A...That 1997 Rose Bowl was one heck of a good game. Although I was pulling for Arizona St. and Jake the snake to pull it out for the awesomeness that an ASU championship would be, or conversely the controversy over 2 undefeated teams had FSU then won. Fucking Joe Germaine, I still haven't forgiven you for that last minute drive.Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07353671003212539401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164068887774716912006-11-20T19:28:00.000-05:002006-11-20T19:28:00.000-05:00By this reasoning Dan, will you renounce Florida's...<I>By this reasoning Dan, will you renounce Florida's football championship? They lost to Florida State and then played them in a rematch for the national championship.</I><BR/>You cannot compare the two. <BR/>Here’s why.<BR/>#1 Florida lost a very close heartbreaking game to #2 FSU, @ FSU, in a game that many deemed a classic 24-21 FSU. They fell to 4th in the country behind 1 loss Nebraska. <BR/><BR/>Nebraska lost the Big 12 title game pushing them down and moving Florida up to 3rd before the bowls.<BR/><BR/>The Pac 10/Big 10 were still stuck with their “traditional Rose Bowl” and therefore if a Pac 10 or Big 10 team was #2 they would have to go to the Rose Bowl and not the Bowl Coalition’s Championship game. Arizona State was #2 and lost to Ohio State in the Rose Bowl the night before the Florida/FSU “rematch” which then made the Sugar Bowl for all the marbles. <BR/><BR/>The Bowl Coalition put together the top 2 teams from the Coaches Poll unless they were in the Big 10 or Pac 10. Therefore under the agreement #1 FSU had to play #3 Florida<BR/><BR/>Florida was not handed the #2 ranking because the game at Doak was a classic 1 v. 2 match up that deserved a rematch. They needed a lot of help to get their shot to win the title.<BR/><BR/>Joe (Dayton)Trey (formerly TF)https://www.blogger.com/profile/16016679366233865869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164065019883364282006-11-20T18:23:00.000-05:002006-11-20T18:23:00.000-05:00I appreciate your being civil, pootietang. This a...I appreciate your being civil, pootietang. This argument could probably go on into the night, but I can't keep going over the same points.<BR/><BR/>Here is our argument as I see it:<BR/>1) you believe that it is most important to have a champion<BR/> -my counterargument is, your method only does this by creating a system whereby you can only have one team left at the end, imperfect though it may be<BR/>2) I believe that it is most important to find out who's number one<BR/> -your counterargument is, you prefer the worst case scenario of a tournament (where a team like Villanova, which is clearly not the best team, can win it all), over that of a BCS match, (where there could be disagreement after the two best teams play--which I have shown would be solved every year it has happened by adding a plus-one game, but I won't beat a dead horse)<BR/><BR/>I will add that the popular choice is not by definition the correct one (another case of correlation doesn't imply causation), so please don't invoke that to legitimize your preferred system. I haven't been persuaded by anything you've said, and I guess the same applies for you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164063961661436542006-11-20T18:06:00.000-05:002006-11-20T18:06:00.000-05:00A lot of pundits are saying that Michigan deserves...A lot of pundits are saying that Michigan deserves to play in the 2006 National Championship against the Ohio State University in spite of losing to them in the regular season finale. I disagree.<BR/><BR/>Sure, Michigan gave a good account of themselves against Ohio State in a vehemently hostile environment. Sure, the game was a monster matchup considering they were both 11-0, and considering the historic rivalry between the two teams. Sure, they both tore apart each other's championship calibre defenses. However, consider for a moment that Michigan never lead OSU in the entire game. Consider that Michigan trailed by at least a touchdown almost throughout the game. Consider that Troy Smith and Jim Tressel have had Michigan's number for the past four years. Do you really want to see a Ohio State Michigan matchup? I certainly don't.<BR/><BR/>If USC wins out, then there is no doubt in my mind that they should play for the National Championship. A Jim Tressel-Pete Carroll matchup is as good as it gets! Things get interesting if they don't. It might then be a tossup between a one-loss SEC team (either Florida or Arkansas is such a possibility at this time), Notre Dame, and Michigan. Arkansas doesn't quite make the cut because of the sound thrashing USC gave them in their home opener. Notre Dame too was whopped by Michigan at home. So the run is really between a possible one-loss Florida team and Michigan. If Florida puts on a show in its last two games vs. Florida State and Arkansas respectively, then, in my mind, the Gators will have earned their championship berth.<BR/><BR/>Go Trojans!<BR/><BR/>http://chillifrost.livejournal.comAmit Choprahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09172086167631810283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164062890909939102006-11-20T17:48:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:48:00.000-05:00eric: you are making my point for me. for some u...eric: you are making my point for me. for some unknown reason, college football, at the division 1 level, has always been about trying to figure out who the best team is, instead of crowning a champion. hence, the controversy every year, some much more than others. we, as fans, and i do think the coaches and players will agree, want to settle it on the field of play, that is, a champion. d-1 football somehow has set itself apart from all of the other division in football, all of the other ncaa sports, as well as professional and even high school sports. we all understand that a tournament will not always give us the best team, and we are all ok with that, because at least 'x' number of teams had a chance to win it all. we do, however, want our champions. and we don't want them to be mythical. if the bcs or bowl system, or even a plus-one is the best way to go about finding a champion, all other sports at every level should get on board with that. i would respectfully disagree that it is the best way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164062297762522622006-11-20T17:38:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:38:00.000-05:00My mistake. Auburn got burned in 04. Where is my ...My mistake. Auburn got burned in 04. Where is my memory?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164062056730814932006-11-20T17:34:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:34:00.000-05:00chrth:I'm referring to the seasons where Oregon an...chrth:<BR/>I'm referring to the seasons where Oregon and Auburn were left out of the big picture. I know they were consecutive years, maybe 2000 and 2001?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164061736547699852006-11-20T17:28:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:28:00.000-05:00pootie:"Tournament-winner" and "best team" are two...pootie:<BR/>"Tournament-winner" and "best team" are two unrelated terms. They may coincide certain years, but correlation does not imply causation. I repeat: correlation DOES NOT imply causation.<BR/><BR/>There is only one controversy that can exist in college football: the second best team in the country doesn't get to play the best team. A plus-one solves that every single year. A tournament doesn't.<BR/><BR/>This is why a tournament is theoretically perfect: The assumption that the better team wins each game. 1-16, 2-15,...then eventually 1-4, 2-3, then 1-2. But the problem is, that doesn't happen. Or are you trying to argue that it does?<BR/><BR/>Upsets are a fact of life in the fast-paced, fluky world of tournaments. I'm not talking about where the favored team loses. I'm talking about when the *better* team loses. Upsets are fun, but they have nothing to do with determining the best team in the country. I'm not saying a tournament wouldn't be fun, but it also wouldn't solve the problem with college football's Nat'l Championship. In fact, it would be worse. Good for Villanova, they won the trophy. But they weren't the best team that year. They were very good--you have to be to beat one of the best teams in the history of the sport. But they were not the best team, they just had a great, great game.<BR/><BR/>In college basketball, you're playing to win a tournament. In college football, you're playing to prove you're the best. If you want to prove you're the very best, you have to play the very best, and in a system where upsets are inherent, that does not happen every year.<BR/><BR/>Unless you want to prove to me that tournaments figure out the best team in the country every year, I don't see the point in discussing this with you any more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164061086102686492006-11-20T17:18:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:18:00.000-05:00I know there are some number who will read this an...I know there are some number who will read this and certainly not agree with me, but I still contend that OSU is not <B>clearly</B> the best team in the country, and I think (the gall!) Michigan is one team they still need to prove it against.<BR/><BR/>Ohio State is apparently the best team in Ohio Stadium, but I think that HFA leaves room for doubt about who's best at playing football (as opposed to <A HREF="http://draconnery.blogspot.com/2006/11/um-39-os-42.html" REL="nofollow">playing two different games on the same field</A>). I know we switch off years and stuff, but the coincidence of the annual schedule wheel doesn't count as part of your football team's skill, as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately for me, there are, I think, 1,000 articles on ESPN.com that are ignoring this issue entirely, and handing OSU the universe.<BR/><BR/>If OSU can win at the Shoe, but Michigan could win at the House and perhaps at that crazy stadium in Arizona, in what way has Ohio State proven dominance? We really don't know how those other two games would turn out, and I think it would not be a travesty to find out. (In fact, I would pay any money to watch the rubber match in the Big House. Wouldn't you?)<BR/><BR/>So obviously, I'm in favor of a rematch, but please don't yell at me, because if the BCS decides the SEC deserves a shot instead, I'm not gonna get all nuts. The same might be true of USC, even though they suck.<BR/><BR/>Besides, if Michigan should now be eliminated from consideration for all this, what the fuck are USC and UF and Arkansas still doing in the picture? If one of our premises is that a three-point win in the Shoe undeniably establishes OSU as the cream of the crop, the #1 team in the country, why would we even bother to send one of those other teams to play them? How about we just call the National Championship now, unplayed?<BR/><BR/>Michigan doesn't deserve a shot for their close loss on the road to a great team, so obviously USC doesn't deserve a shot, due to their close loss on the road to a middling-to-bad team. Arkansas obviously is out, based on their huge home loss to a team which we have already disqualified, while Florida lost as well, so they have nothing to say in this picture. ND hardly merits mentioning. Of course, you're ready to say that my argument leaves room only for Boise State, but don't bring that trash 'round here.<BR/><BR/>I understand the "consecutive games vs. the same opponents" argument, but the "Michigan is clearly NOT #1" argument seems hollow to me; Michigan did not get annihilated, and other conditions were certainly in OSU's favor.<BR/><BR/>The thing about the consecutive games argument is, I still think it would be a pretty compelling event. Also, the teams might be the same, but the conditions will be different. If OSU can pull out another one with the conditions balanced and teams playing football being the only variables, there you go. If Michigan can beat OSU, given a nice strong field to run on - I say they deserve the title.john (east lansing, mi)https://www.blogger.com/profile/03872457640564913468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164060756983576222006-11-20T17:12:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:12:00.000-05:00@eric: Uh, how would 2002 have benefitted from a p...@eric: Uh, how would 2002 have benefitted from a plus-one? The only two major undefeateds played in the Fiesta Bowl.Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164060391174089232006-11-20T17:06:00.001-05:002006-11-20T17:06:00.001-05:00Bucks. Number. One.Where are the manninghams!!???Bucks. Number. One.<BR/><BR/>Where are the manninghams!!???Jenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11071405721004631626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164060390420168052006-11-20T17:06:00.000-05:002006-11-20T17:06:00.000-05:00John-Perhaps us Pac-10 types are waiting to see if...John-<BR/><BR/>Perhaps us Pac-10 types are waiting to see if USC beats ND and UCLA before making any noise...<BR/><BR/>I'm not a real USC fan, but as they play in the in the Pac-10 with my Huskies (who had a surprisingly good season, winning the Apple Cup without their starting QB!), and since Michigan has been defeated by OSU, I really think, should USC win out, that they should get a shot at the championship.aikeharahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05129519727639271961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164059706238764742006-11-20T16:55:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:55:00.000-05:00and last i checked, no one was telling '85 villano...and last i checked, no one was telling '85 villanova hoops, the steelers, mlb cardinals, gator hoops, mount union(d-3 champ last year) to give their rings back. but mamy many people feel that nebraska('01), ou('04), neb('97) among others should not have even been in the discussion about champions, let alone have the chance to play for it. hey, i am a gator and i know that osu and asu both had claims to the '96 crown. i am much more comfortable with '06 gator hoops title being earned.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164059433439416852006-11-20T16:50:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:50:00.000-05:00eric: sorry, your argument does not make sense. t...eric: sorry, your argument does not make sense. the reason the bcs is so controversial is because it does not decide things on the field of play. tell '85 villanova hoops about what it means to be a champion. no one will argue that they were the best team that year, but they can say "fuck you" we are the champions. steelers same thing. d-1aa, d-2, and d-3(32 team playoff) in college football is the same way. it is a given that a majority of the fans now want a playoff, and the coaches are now coming around, too. this notion that we somehow have to determine who the best team is in d-1 college football by votes and opinions and computers is ridiculous. use those things to get the 16 teams in and then go play the games.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164058566217385712006-11-20T16:36:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:36:00.000-05:00pootie:I see your point about the word "champion."...pootie:<BR/>I see your point about the word "champion." But I don't understand it.<BR/><BR/>But with all due respect, I don't think *anyone* means that when they say champion. They mean "the best team." I'd like to know one person besides you that really thinks any team but the best should be crowned champion. That's ludicrous. What they do want is for that claim to be indisputable, and that's what is leading to arguments. We want to know how to make that claim indisputable.<BR/><BR/>You don't prove you're the best by playing #16, then #8, then #4, then #2. 16 and 8 are irrelevant, because there have never been 16 (or even 3) teams with legitimate claims at number one. Before the bowl season, there have never been more than four, and after, there's never been more than one that hadn't gotten its shot. Just give that team their shot and you've added "undisputed" to the equation.<BR/><BR/>A playoff changes everything, and fixes nothing. A plus-one simply fixes the current system. And I instruct that you look at 1993, 1997, 2001 and 2002 as real-life examples of seasons that a plus-one game would have resolved completely. If you want, I could meet you halfway and just call it a four-game playoff (even though the first round is the bowl season), but it is a waste of everyone's time to put even eight teams on the same plane of existence by the end of the season. To do so is to waste OSU or USC's time humoring teams that lost their credibility during the season.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164057997722622242006-11-20T16:26:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:26:00.000-05:00have to agree w/john at this point. NO one is goi...have to agree w/john at this point. NO one is going to see the other's point of view. In the end, Michigan lost. If they get a rematch, great for them, but even if they lose I doubt the excuses would stop. If they win, it is a fraud since they didn't deserve to be there. <BR/><BR/>I remember all the cocky michigan fans talking last week about "holding Tressel to it" if OSU lost (re: Tressel saying pre-game that there should be no rematch), suddenly they are gone.<BR/><BR/>I think UM is the 2nd best team in the country, but I don't really think it matters who #2 is.<BR/><BR/>Go. Bucks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164057536212670162006-11-20T16:18:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:18:00.000-05:00jeezy chreezy; it is quite obvious to me at this p...jeezy chreezy; it is quite obvious to me at this point that no one is going to be convinced by anyone.<BR/><BR/>let's just let the rest of the season play itself out, and then we can fight to the death over the BCS standings that we end up with.<BR/><BR/><BR/>It might even be easier for everyone, if we wait a little while; the d-bags who were already pimping "undefeated Rutgers" (whoever she is) over the Big Ten's #2 team wasted some energy on that...<BR/><BR/>If ND beats USC (no stretch, since USC secretly sucks), and especially if the SEC bites itself in the ass, this will be 119 (and counting) comments posted in vain.<BR/><BR/>If that doesn't happen, go ahead and lobby your local relevant poll voters. Vote early and vote often. Whatever.<BR/><BR/><BR/>A random observation - is it just me, or are there zero USC/Pac-10 fans active in the comments section of this blog? Surely there are computers in California, no? So weird.john (east lansing, mi)https://www.blogger.com/profile/03872457640564913468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164056853478759352006-11-20T16:07:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:07:00.000-05:00119 teams.119 teams.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164056596064257272006-11-20T16:03:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:03:00.000-05:00BECAUSE there are 122 teams in DivIA, I don't care...BECAUSE there are 122 teams in DivIA, I don't care about the Wolverines. They didn't play tough competition, and they lost to the best team in the land. Now we want to find someone who CAN beat OSU, fairly, facing them for the first time. Someone other than Mich.<BR/><BR/>Because Rutgers doesn't get a "do-over" for Cincinnati. And USC can't get Oregon State back.<BR/><BR/>And there is no mythical "best team" or "best two teams". Matchups are important, and maybe Florida can succeed with defense where Michigan failed with good luck and a shootout. As long as there IS a bowl system, they should try for an interesting matchup that hasn't been seen already this year.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164056525338411782006-11-20T16:02:00.001-05:002006-11-20T16:02:00.001-05:00I like watching more football.Whether its a bowl o...I like watching more football.<BR/>Whether its a bowl or not, i don't care.You could do a playoff...and the rest of the bowls are the NIT.<BR/><BR/>It works. hehrafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09286062038193331350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164056520631600962006-11-20T16:02:00.000-05:002006-11-20T16:02:00.000-05:00eric: it is not about deermining the best team. i...eric: it is not about deermining the best team. it is about determining a champion. steelers, gator hoops, mlb cardinals, etc. i think that is all the fans really want.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1164056143094908632006-11-20T15:55:00.000-05:002006-11-20T15:55:00.000-05:00here is an argument why mich is NOT #2: Georgia, ...here is an argument why mich is NOT #2: Georgia, Tenn, LSU, Auburn, Arkansas, South Carolina, and even Alabama would be favorites over every team in the big-10 save osu, mich, and bucky. mich played all those crappy teams, oh, and notre dame, to build up this "great defense" which got exposed against osu. there's your argument.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com