Does anybody think Michigan got screwed in the BCS?

[Wetzelbill]

I am not sure. I think it is a pretty tough deal that they sat out this week and it hurt them in the sense that they did not have one more game to help them out. But that is twofold, they could also fall flat in an extra game too, but in this case we'll never know. Florida played great yesterday for sure, but are they truly better than Michigan? Tough call. The BCS is infuriatingly flawed, for sure.

[pokerfan]

1. I would have loved to have seen a rematch

followed by a Michigan win. That way both OSU and Mich would have identical records with one loss to each other but Michigan would have been hailed as the national champions. That would have been fun.

Anything that would further discredit the BCS.

[SeattleGirl]

2. Yes, Michigan got screwed in the BCS.

Yesterday, during the SEC game, the three talking heads were talking about the BCS during halftime. The idiot in the middle was making the point that Michigan "sat at home" on Saturday. The other two talking heads -- who brought their brains along for the occasion -- pointed out that Michigan's regular season was over; it wasn't like they forfeited a game. "Why should Michigan be punished because they were not scheduled to play yesterday?" Plus Michigan's conference doesn't have a championship game like the SEC does. Seems to me that the BCS is punishing apples for not being oranges, if you know what I mean.

Fuck the BCS.

[LSdemocrat]

3. Yes, but they primarily got screwed by the human polls which make up the BCS

Both the AP and Harris Poll voters vaulted Florida above Michigan, which put Florida in the title game since Florida and Michigan finished tied in the computer rankings.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/BCSStandings

[petronius]

12. Yeah, it seems like the voters were more interested in avoiding a rematch

than in deciding which team was actually better. It may technically be a screwing - I'm not sure Florida is better than Michigan - but I like it: Michigan got a shot at OSU and a new match-up could be interesting. The title will be more meaningful if OSU beats FL too, and if FL wins we'll all have something to argue about in the off-season.

My only complaint is that I was looking forward to seeing LSU in the Rose Bowl.

[SCantiGOP]

64. remember the computer poll

MI and FL were exactly tied in the computer poll, so that diminishes any argument that Michigan got screwed. The voters felt like Florida played a tougher schedule, and the #2 team in a conference didn't have a right to play for the national championship.

[MrCoffee]

65. i don't buy the "tougher schedule" argument...

personally, i think the voters didn't want a rematch, didn't want an all Big 10 championship game, and Urban Meyer is a crybaby.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

68. There's no argument to buy.

Florida's schedule was statistically tougher. Period.

[SCantiGOP]

72. oh pul-eese

Compare the two schedules. Nine of the twelve teams Florida played are going to bowl games. Look at the rankings for the SEC and Big Ten. No comparison.

[CatholicEdHead]

4. Not any more than Wisconsin

[JVS]

10. Sounds about right

[moondust]

48. Badgers got screwed.

Half the teams in the BCS games ended up with 2 losses and ranked lower than WI yet WI does not get into a BCS game. And WI's only loss was at Michigan by 2 touchdowns. Go figure.

[JVS]

59. Only two teams per conference are allowed to go

Michigan and OSU go, Wisconsin stays

[Tony Soprano]

5. Nope, they had their shot...

but the BCS is flawed and a playoff instituted.

[Tony Soprano]

7. Read:; "Needs to be instituted"...sorry

n/t

[Catchawave]

6. I will never understand the BCS...

it's almost like how we elect Pretzeldents :silly:

Guess we're happy about Florida because Percy Harvin's a hometown boy.

[bif]

8. Yes but...

I'd like to go back to the good old days. Where the top teams went to the Rose Bowl and the Orange Bowl. Forget about the best team. Unless you have a playoff like for the Suberbowl, the system doesn't really determine the best team.

[fishwax]

9. I don't think so. They had their chance and lost.

So I don't think they have too much room to complain. Of course, Michigan is one of my secondary teams, since I have a lot of family there, so I wouldn't have been too offended had they made it.

[SeattleGirl]

11. Apples and Oranges, fishwax

The SEC has a championship game; the Big 10 does not. One of the reasons that Florida was picked over Michigan was 'because they won their conference championship game'. Well, that is illogical. They (The BCS and their defenders) are talking as if all things are equal, when in fact they are not. I would like to see the BCS system banned, period. Until everything truly is equal, then you cannot really make an argument that "they had their chance and lost." Michigan wasn't playing Ohio State in a championship game like Florida was playing Arkansas yesterday.

[fishwax]

14. what's apples and oranges about it?

Michigan had a chance to play Ohio State. They lost. It wasn't a "Conference Championship Game," but the game was for the conference championship.

I don't see what it matters that the Michigan-Ohio State game was not an official Conference Championship Game, or why that fact ought to work in Michigan's favor.

Michigan was in the driver's seat to get the BCS Championship game. All they had to do was keep winning. Since they failed to take care of business, their fate is left in someone else's hands. I can see the argument that Michigan ought to be in instead of Florida, but I wouldn't say they got screwed, since they controlled their destiny two weeks ago and were not able to close the deal.

[SeattleGirl]

15. Sorry, I still think it's apples and oranges.

When one of the reasons is, as I said, that the SEC has a championship game (formally called a "Championship Game") and the Big 10 does not. College football seems to be the only sport where a bunch of people not playing in the actual games gets to pick who they want to have win or go to certain games, etc. Seems that in other sports, it's the records that determine things, not outsiders. I still say it's unfair and it's wrong. And to the argument that "a playoff system wouldn't work", I say, why not? College basketball has a playoff system. Why can't football?

If the BCS were such a great system, there wouldn't be so many complaints about it.

[fishwax]

16. I can certainly understand not liking the BCS system

And I don't propose to defend it, really. Of course, under the old bowl system it would probably be USC vs. Ohio State in the Rose and Florida-Michigan in the Sugar. Perhaps that would even be preferable--if the undefeated team wins, they win the MNC, and if not then the winner of the also-rans game wins the MNC.

I don't support a playoff because I like the bowl games, I like the regular season, and it doesn't bother me that there is controversy and debate as opposed to a universally-agreed upon and official national champion.

I think a playoff system would "work" in the sense that it would determine a conclusive champion, but I don't think it would necessarily identify the "best" team any better than the current system does. If, for instance, we had a four-team playoff, who gets in? Does Michigan still deserve to make the playoffs over a team that actually won their conference? I wouldn't mind an +1 or a +2 system that some have proposed, where the winners of the major bowls play each other in a playoff format. :)

With respect to Florida and Michigan, I'm not comparing the two or comparing Florida's Conference Championship vs. Michigan's failure to win their ocnference. I'm just saying that Michigan had a chance to play their way into the BCS Game and didn't get it done. So I don't think they got screwed.

[SeattleGirl]

19. Well, we will have to agree to disagree on some things.

But I will say, I love the bowl games, and wouldn't want to see them go away. My main beef with the BCS is that humans pick who goes where, and as we know, humans have their faults, their biases, their prejudices, etc. That's the main problem I have with it.

[L A Woman]

26. Yeah I agree and I rather like the BCS system, flawed as it may be...

I have been a fan of college football since the mid-80s or so and I was really getting bored with it in the 90s...bowl game, bowl game, blah blah blah and I don't care about any other team but mine. NOW...we have a system that is 2/3 human and 1/3 computer, it's based on many factors and usually in the end, it pretty much gets it right. Short of a playoff system, which is unlikely for a variety of reasons, the BCS is a pretty good (and fun!) way of doing things. It keeps you interested in a lot of games, too, because of the way it might affect your team's ranking...

So back to Michigan...it could have gone either way, but the human element of the BCS was the deciding factor. Nobody wanted to see what was essentially the Big Ten championship game AGAIN.

There are some glitches, but every year they make it a little better.

We could ask God to tell us straight out which team is REALLY the best, but other than that...what would you suggest?

[PVnRT]

54. This "they had their chance" stuff is garbage

They "had their chance"? No, not in a national championship game, and, last I checked, this isn't Little Leauge where everyone has to get one at-bat per game. The national championship is supposed to be between the two best teams, period. Adding in factors like that just cheapens everything.

And if you really think Florida is a better team than Michigan...wow.

[fishwax]

63. well, that's rather absurd

And if you really think Florida is a better team than Michigan...wow.
Well, Florida is ahead of Michigan in both polls, so thinking Florida is better than Michigan isn't exactly a wingnut position. But perhaps you actually have an argument for why you apparently think it's an absurd suggestion?

The national championship is supposed to be between the two best teams. Michigan had a chance to prove they belonged there. They lost. They controlled their own destiny, but let it slip away.

Of course it isn't little league and everyone doesn't get a shot. But since there is but one game and two teams, you have a better chance of finding the best team in the country if you don't limit it to a contest that was already decided two weeks ago.

Florida played a tougher schedule than Michigan, played in a much tougher conference than Michigan, and have several quality wins on their resume, as opposed to Michigan, who beat overrated Notre Dame and an outstanding Wisconsin team.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

70. I absolutely think Florida is MILES better.

Michigan had only two wins against anything you'd consider an elite team: the overrated Notre Dame and the underrated Wisconsin Badgers.

Florida had wins against Tennessee, Arkansas, and LSU, all BCS Top 17 schools and another win against Georgia, which gets a 26 ranking. They won 12 games against the statistically toughest schedule in college football, while Michigan won 11 against the 3rd toughest schedule.

So, where exactly is my argument missing here? You're trying to tell me that losing to the #1 school in the country by a margin that was very deceptively small (they were getting blown out at one point) means more than any other factor?

[Brotherjohn]

77. No. 1 was playing no. 2 near the end of the season. If MI didn't "get" that, then...

... they wouldn't deserve another chance on that count alone.

But of course they "got" it. They KNEW they were playing for the national championship right there.

No, it's not about just giving anybody a shot, an "at bat" as you say. Nor is FL "just anybody". It's about trying to pick, based on yes, apples and oranges, who the two best teams to play for No. 1 are.

But the apples and oranges argument don't extend only to saying what FL did versus what MI did. It applies to every single vote in every poll, computer or human. It even applies to saying OSU is ther best team... it's a guess... (otherwise, we'd just give them the trophy b/c they're undefeated... but wait, isn't Boise State, too?). It's pure conjecture unless they could play every single team.

A playoff is better, but until then, two teams deciding it on the field gives you the best indication. And MI and OSU already decided it on the field. Obviously, in most voters' minds, that trumped all of their "guesses" based on comparing apples and oranges.

"Okay, we have MI and FL. Both one-loss teams in very strong conferences that everyone agrees are in the top 3 teams in the country. Let's try to subjectively compare all these apples and oranges to "guess" who's better (them never having played). FL did this... MI did that... FL did such and such... MI played so and so... Oh, wait! We're trying to decide who plays OSU for the title, right? MI already that, and lost. Case closed."

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

13. Yes, Michigan got screwed, and the BCS "system" sucks.

[Blue-Jay]

36. Screwed how? By losing to the best team in the nation?

It was a great game, but they certainly didn't get screwed. They lost.

A rematch is not owed to them.

[Giant Robot]

38. No one is saying the rematch is owed to them

The rematch is deserved because the championship game is supposed to be between the two best teams, and in many minds, Michigan is number 2.

This is not about the OSU/Michigan game. We lost. OSU won. No one is giving you a vast Wolverine conspiracy that the game was fixed, so settle down.

What the point is, I think, that Michigan deserves its number 2 spot and a championship bid, because they were ranked so highly, had a tough schedule as well, and their only loss was to a higher ranked team. Florida's loss came to a lesser ranked team, and mainly got its position because Michigan's schedule had them end their season sooner, thus no chance to impress the polls, and because there was a great sentiment that no one wanted to see a rematch. Which should not be the case if it were truly about the championship.

That is the point.

[Blue-Jay]

43. Actually, I think that's precisely what you're saying.

I rather see OSU play the best team that they haven't already beaten.

[Giant Robot]

44. Actually no its not

The best team may not be one that they haven't beaten yet, unless of course you want to consider my local community college football team better than Michigan because OSU has not beaten them. The best team is not necessarily one they have not beaten.

I can certainly understand you wanting to see OSU play a team they haven't beaten this season already, thinking that would be more exciting. Good for you. But if the BCS wants to call it a championship between the number 1 and 2 teams, I am not even close to thinking that Florida deserves number 2 status. Florida started out this week number 4, beat a lower ranked team, and jumped up to number 2. Umm yeah. Sure.

If they want to call it something else, or go back to the old system, good on them. But don't call this a championship. I don't think that is even close to right.

[MrCoffee]

17. I'd rather see Florida lose to OSU for the first time than Mich lose again

[Broken_Hero]

18. That about sums it up for me...right there

your post was short, and to the point...:D I can't wait for a playoff system for college football...but I'm not going to hold my breath on that one...

[SeattleGirl]

21. You are assuming Michigan would automatically lose again.

Not taking anything away from Ohio State -- no doubt they are a great team. But just because one team loses to another does not mean they will certainly lose again the next time they meet.

[WCGreen]

30. Looking at the Big Game between OSU and Mich, you can see that

the only reason it was as close as it was was because Ohio State blew two snaps that resulted in two scores for Mich....

Now I know that mistakes are part of the game, but Ohio State was cool enough, disciplined enough not to let that effect how they played the game... There was a point in the game where Mich coach Lloyd Carr lost his cool while Tressel remain calm and collected... That sends a message the players, both men

Now, look at the game yesterday between USC and UCLA... After UCLA scored to take a one point lead, the game was, for all intents and purposes, over... USC was back on their heels and they are not as disciplined as OSU... And they didn't have Reggie Bush...

It all comes down to talent and coaching... Good coaching can over come mediocrity... And Tressel is on the verge of becoming one of the greatest coaches in College Football History.... Lloyd Carr is great recruiter, he takes away a lot of Ohio boys, but so was former OSU coach Cooper and he never could win a big game...

[MrCoffee]

62. I'm assuming that it doesn't matter at all who the other team is in AZ...OSU is gonna win

and i'm not a Buckeye's fan. I just don't see anybody beating them.

[Brotherjohn]

78. No, but you can't just keep having the same two teams meet. Plus, what if they win?

What does that settle? One team won once, the other team won once. A tie for the NC?

The bowls, and the BCS, are too limiting as it is. Keeping it "in the family" and would only limit it further (and unnecessarily, when these two teams have already settled it on the field).

[JVS]

61. Best answer in thread!

[Kerrytravelers]

20. What bowl will Michigan go to? The Rose Bowl?

If yes, they'll play my team (USC) and that could be a good game. It is a shame thought, if they really belong at the Championship game that they're not there because of some silly "rematch" thing. In the NFL, if two tams played each other already, would one be excluded from the Super Bowl game because of a "rematch?" Well, that's the analogy a friend used the other day. I don't know if it holds water or not, but nonetheless, I could care less about a rematch, the top two teams are who should play. Period.

[Threedifferentones]

33. The teams really are "too close to call"

Both have one loss to another top ten team. Can anyone really claim that the team which played the nation's toughest schedule (Florida)does not deserve to be in the NCG? No more than one could claim that the team with only one loss and the #2 toguhest schedule (Michigan) doesn't deserve it. So, it really does come to the "human" element, and more people want a new match-up.

At the time of the Michigan-OSU game, I understood that the winner would play in the NCG while the loser would go to the Rose Bowl, and I thought everyone else did as well.

[Kerrytravelers]

52. "and I thought everyone else did as well"

I hope I'm misreading your tone.

Otherwise, gee, why be snippy? I was simply asking. Please, accept my apologies for being so stupid. :eyes:

I wasn't making any claims other than tossing out a comment someone made to me the other day and asking if it is Michigan who will be playing USC in the Rose Bowl.


Again, I hope I was misreading your tone. If I am, my apologies. If not, that's a shame.

[Wapsie B]

22. Nope. Michigan had their chance.

And I think that factored in to the choice of Florida to matchup with THE Ohio State University. If Michigan and OSU had not played in the regular season I could've seen both teams in the title game.

[cboy4]

23. I can't imagine why anyone would think their team got scewed by

the BCS. It's such a fair system. :sarcasm:

[gr8dane_daddy]

24. That's why we need a 16 team playoff system...

I'd rather complain about who should be in the 16th spot rather and the 2nd.

I think not having a conference title game hurt Michigan. On the other hand, such a game can hurt teams as well...catch-22.

[L A Woman]

29. see post 28

Why do so many people want to make college football into the NFL? Forget the playoff system - these are college students. That's what's so great about it! It's great to me that one loss can ruin a football season...it creates an exciting, desperate energy that isn't there in the NFL. If you want to make a change, maybe each conference should be required to have a championship game and only those winners can be considered for the championship, but you'd get the same results as you do now most of the time.

[gr8dane_daddy]

31. There's playoffs in every level of collegiate sports...

including football. Are you saying playoffs for Div II and III are less important to those folks? I bet the energy is still there.

[gr8dane_daddy]

32. There's playoffs in every level of collegiate sports...

including football. Are you saying playoffs for Div II and III are less important to those folks? I bet the energy is still there.

[trackfan]

25. No. They got SCREWN1!!111!!

[SeattleGirl]

27. Methinks that is the primary purpose of the BCS

To make sure a great team gets screwn! :grr:

[L A Woman]

28. But without a playoff system what would you suggest?

And there won't be a playoff system. The financial power of the bowl system is too great AND there is widespread opposition because these ARE college students, after all, and to take them into a 16-game season that goes well into the new year would be absurd.

Actually, I just had a brilliant idea. Fuck all the one-loss teams. If you aren't undefeated at the end of the season, you cannot play for the national championship. Then you can't whine and moan because another one-loss team had a harder schedule than yours and is thus considered a better team. Had we done that this year, Ohio State would play Boise State in the championship and beat them 120-3 and everyone would be happy. :-)

[Blue-Jay]

34. How many times does OSU have to beat Michigan this year?

[huskerlaw]

35. Nope.

They already lost to Ohio State. They don't deserve a mulligan.

[Giant Robot]

37. Michigan was screwn

First of all, I am tired of hearing the "they had their chance" argument. Well that's nice but if we are looking at a championship match between the number 1 and 2 teams here, then that matters not one little bit. Or to put it this way....If say the Detroit Lions and the New England Patriots play a cross conference game and (surprise) the Lions lose. Then say there is some form of divine intervention (mainly on the part of the Lions) and both teams go to the Super Bowl that year. I doubt there will be a person alive saying that the Lions should not be there because they had their chance and blew it. Yes the NFL is a different system, but the idea remains the same.

This was decided based more on who people wanted to see matched up for the championship. I'm not saying that is good bad or otherwise. I am a Michigan alum, and I am not even sure who I would want to see play OSU. But to have the championship be based on a coach's whining, and reported demands of lawsuits by said coach, and people being fickle about not wanting two Big Ten teams in the playoff is ridiculous. If they want to call it a championship then it had better be between the best two teams, and I am far from convinced that Florida is better than Michigan.

The BCS has always been a clusterfuck from its inception. Maybe they just simply need to throw out the whole championship term and move onto something else. I don't know. But Michigan was screwn.

[SeattleGirl]

39. Amen, Giant Robot. Amen.

This manipulative game called the BCS is absolutely full of shit.

[Giant Robot]

41. Thanks SeattleGirl n/t

[underpants]

53. Harder schedule, Conference Champs (with a Champ. Game), UM had their shot

Florida was always the clear choice. I am very surprised that the BCS got it right.

[PVnRT]

55. Uh...Michigan had the #3 hardest schedule

How many BCS top-25 teams did Florida beat again? And remind us what happened when they played Vanderbilt.

[underpants]

57. And Florida had the ....wait for it..... #1 toughest schedule

http://sports-att.espn.go.com/ncf/clubhouse?teamId=57
They beat 7 bowl teams lost to 1 -Auburn

Which is actually the same as Michigan (the LOST to Ohio State)

[PVnRT]

60. Ohio State = #1, Auburn = #9

Oooooops, so much for that strength of schedule thing again.

[southlandshari]

74. Before you dis Auburn....

don't forget they beat the teams that ended up at #2 and #4 in the final pre-bowl rankings this season.

Auburn lost to a very strong Arkansas team and had a shitty day against their second-biggest rival UGA. And beat everyone else they played, including several Top 25 teams.

I'm just saying...it isn't as if the gap between the Tigers and the Buckeyes is some sort of huge chasm and Auburn is at the bottom of the NCAA barrel.

Michigan had their shot at Ohio State, and played a great game but left with the loss. Florida deserves their shot at them now.

[Awsi Dooger]

40. The BCS was always unnecessary

Identical to its predecessor, the Bowl Coalition.

Twenty years ago you had many teams alive for the championship on New Years Day. And it was awesome the way the dominos would fall at times. I was an Oklahoma fan in the '70s when UCLA upset a great Ohio St team in the Rose Bowl, allowing Oklahoma to defeat Michigan that night in the Orange Bowl for the national title. Eight years later I sweated out every second of Georgia's 10-9 upset rally over unbeaten Texas in the Cotton Bowl, keeping my Canes alive for the title, and they won it by edging Nebraska 31-30 in the famous Orange Bowl upset that night.

With this system you have primarily crap. A flurry of who cares games spread out over many days, and now the championship game pushed back all the way to January 8. Why don''t we make it the day before the Pro Bowl? It's asinine.

This year under the old system you would have Ohio St vs USC in the Rose Bowl, the Trojans basically at home with a chance to deny their old rival a national title. Florida as the SEC champ would probably play Michigan in the Sugar Bowl, those two teams sweating out the Rose Bowl before taking the field themselves. The Orange Bowl would be Oklahoma playing Louisville, or perhaps Wisconsin or LSU. You wouldn't have that garbage limiting only two teams from a conference in the major bowls. Then distribute the remaining top teams to the Cotton Bowl and Fiesta Bowl.

All on New Years Day, like it should be.

And if you get multiple champions and a dash of controversy, what's wrong with that? It''s far better than pretending you can distinguish between two or three teams and slotting them into an all or nothing situation. Especially when you've got crap like what happened today, some voters apparently relegating Florida to 5th on their ballots, trying to sway the system in favor of Michigan. I wanted Michigan in the game since I dislike the Gators, but once you see nonsense like that the whole setup should be rejected. Go back to the old dependable tie-ins.

[southlandshari]

45. Well said, my friend

I feel for Michigan, am happy for fellow SEC member Florida, and renew my disdain for the BCS system as a whole.

And before any of you from other schools complain, try on #9 for size. The highest ranked team NOT to get a BCS bowl game slot. And this year's #9 actually BEAT this year's #2 and #4 teams during the regular season!

:banghead:

[SeattleGirl]

47. OMG! shari baby!

How nice to see you! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[southlandshari]

49. Nice

doesn't even begin to describe how great it is for me whenever our paths cross, sweet SG!

:hug:

[SeattleGirl]

50. Aw, thanks.

I've really missed you! Hope all is well with you. :hug:

[Yukari Yakumo]

42. F' the BCS

I'd like it call it the Big Corrupt Scam. That's what it is. It's a system intentionally designed so only a select few colleges can compete for the championship. Colleges like Boise State, no matter how stellar their teams may perform, will never get a fair shot at the title. And year after year, the system never ceases to screw up.

They should (but will never will) implement either a 16-team or a 32-team tournament system. Div 1-AA already does it and has been doing it for a long while. So there's no excuse why Div 1-A can't do the same.

[Crabby Appleton]

46. nope

[1gobluedem]

51. Yes

As a Michigan fan, I didn't even particularly want a rematch. But this is cleary biased because Michigan and Ohio State are from the same conference.

Rose Bowl as a consolation, though? I can live with that. It's just the principle of the thing.

[taterguy]

56. Does it hurt getting screwed in the BCS?

I'm not hip to the lingo and this is a practice I'm not familiar with

[jobycom]

58. Lots of people, but not me. I think Oklahoma got screwed.

Oklahoma had only one legitimate loss, to the number 2 team at the time. They are as good as Michigan, as was LSU.

The whole idea of a national champion is ridiculous in the first place. Teams don't play enough common opponents, and play schedules vastly different in difficulty. USC or Ohio State would not look as good if they played in the SEC and had to face that barage of teams every season. They'd have one or two losses, too. There's no way to arbitrarily pick which of these teams are better than the others. Look at last year, when everyone was so convinced Texas shouldn't be on the same field with USC, that they would be humiliated. Writers talked themselves into believing the PAC 10 was so good, and the Big 12 was so weak. In the end USC and Texas turned out very evenly matched, and in the bowl games the Big 12 faired better than the PAC 10.

And no, a playoff system wouldn't help. You'd still have people arbitrarily picking teams to be in the playoffs. It's just a silly concept. Go back to the old bowl system and let all the people who enjoy fantasy matchups worry about ranking teams in some fictitious order. At least that way the emphasis was on quality of matchup, not on some silly concept of a national champion.

Ohio State v Florida looks like a good matchup, to me. The only teams I think have a good shot at beating OS are in the SEC. Or maybe Oklahoma. But who really knows until they are on the field. We know Ohio State can beat Michigan, so why bother watching it again?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

71. A playoff system would help immensely.

Would you really feel much pity for Auburn being shut out of the playoffs because they finished 9th? If you can't make it into the Top 8, you don't have much of an argument. I didn't feel much pity for Missouri State when they didn't make it to the basketball tournament last year. They might have deserved to go, but realistically, they were not going to win the title. Similarly, neither Auburn nor Oklahoma would've won it all in a playoff this year.

And I feel NO pity for Oklahoma. Every team has gotten jobbed by a call here or there. They should've won that game outright - just as Florida got jobbed in the Auburn game and should have won that one as well. Further, the Big 12 is even more pathetic than the Big 10 is this year. A one-loss team from that conference doesn't even come close to having a national title argument, so even if they didn't get jobbed, they'd still be on the outside looking in.

[jobycom]

73. Only to maintain a fiction.

There is no such thing as a national champion in college football. Not enough common opponents, no consistency in toughness of schedule, and no way to make it otherwise. Maybe if teams like Michigan and Texas played only teams like Ohio State, Florida, etc, instead of teams like Central Michigan or Sam Houston State, you could make some argument. But as it is, the whole idea of a national champion is about as grounded in reality as trying to determine whether Spiderman or Batman would win a fight.

As for the Big 12 being so bad this year, Texas played Ohio State pretty close in the first game of the season, with a first-game freshman QB who could barely through screens. Texas lost to A&M and Kansas, after the freshman QB got good. So I'm not convinced any team could beat any other team until I see them play, or at least play the same team. Everybody said the Big 12 was inferior last year, and it did well in the bowl games, including beating "The Greatest Team Ever" in the Rose Bowl.

It's all horseshit. A playoff system would add to the horsehit, not make it any better. I'd rather see the NCAA scrap the whole idea of a title, and let universities get back to teaching, and sportswriters get back to their own little comic book worlds. The old invitational bowl game system was more honest, because it looked for good matchups, rather than pretending it could pick the best team in any given year.

[gr8dane_daddy]

75. Keep in mind that Texas freshman QB was knocked out of the game

during the first series of the KState game...a backup took over and did a helluva job on the road. Second, Colt wasn't 100% ready for the aggie game either...it was obvious in the play (I was at that game, didn't look as sharp as he did before).

[fishwax]

76. as a sooner fan I appreciate that comment

were it not for the travesty in the last minute of the Oregon game, OU would have definitely been right in the middle of the title talk last week. I still don't think they would have passed Florida for the #2 spot, but who knows.

Still got to say I'm very happy--thrilled even--with how the season worked out, in spite of that Oregon game (along with several other setbacks that could have easily sent a typical team into the tank).

[michreject]

66. Mich got screwed.

Auburn was not in the top ten when they beat Fla. Auburn was ranked #11. Mich played OSU in a hostile environment and lost by 3 pts. Mich got leapfrogged by both USC and Fla. while idle. Being idle should not be a penalty.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

67. Hell no!

Let's take this argument very, very simply, shall we?

Non-conference champion from the ATROCIUS Big Ten? or the champions of easily the toughest conference in college football?

This is not a controversy in any way, shape or form.

[IdaBriggs]

69. Yes, Michigan got screwed, but its okay.

Ohio will *DESTROY* Florida (making the 3 point loss by Michigan look even better), and Michigan will (of course) take the Rose Bowl by a respectable margin. (Lloyd Carr isn't a "run up the score" coach -- when its obvious who has the game, he lets his second and third string get some game time.)

There needs to be a better system -- I don't think anyone has been happy with the BCS stuff in close to forever....

[jrandom421]

79. No

If Michigan was that good, they should have beat Ohio State and won the conference title. To paraphrase the Nature Boy, Ric Flair, "if you want to be THE team, you gotta BEAT THE Team!"