UM & OSU "rematch" for national title (poll)

[The ClayTaurus]

The SEC and the teams they regularly play are one of the main reasons for lack of a tournament. By the end of the tournament, everybody would be starting their second string due to injuries. The kind of hits, speed of play, and overall physical nature of division 1 and especially SEC play is why tournaments involving them are a bad idea (and also why I think Ohio State will find Florida to be a tough opponent). Arkansas and Oklahoma, especially, would cause problems. Even losing 50-14 against USC, Arkansas managed to take out 5 USC players for the rest of the game on a single kickoff return. The ball carrier was even knocked unconcious. Any team would be hard pressed to afford the medical bills from playing Arkansas, Oklahoma, LSU, and Tennessee right in a row, with Georgia, Florida, Auburn, Alabama, Texas, and sometimes Ole Miss also being on the list of ambulance magnets. Even Vandy hits harder than your average non-SEC school, and they're seen as little more than a speed bump in the season. That's why I think it's good to give all of the athletes and couple of weeks off for a Christmas break to get healed up before playing a single, final bowl game, with one determining th National Champions.

And always remember, it's better than it used to be. Once upon a time, there was no Championship game, just post-season standings. Texas even lost its #1 position in the last year of tie games by losing on a failed 2-point conversion for the win in the last game of the season. They finished #3 and said they'd rather have done that than finish #1 by going for an easy tie.

It's sad how much SEC guys have to boast about their conference. Knocking out 5 USC players isn't an accomplishment; the PAC 10 is weak.

 

[Hobbit]

It's sad how much SEC guys have to boast about their conference. Knocking out 5 USC players isn't an accomplishment; the PAC 10 is weak.

No, what's sad is how much non SEC guys fail to realize how tough it is to play in that conference. Florida is 12-1. Michigan is 11-1. Florida has played 4 ranked teams, all in conferance (Arkansas has played 6, 5 in conference). Michigan has played 2. Florida wins that ranking off of strength of schedule.

It's also sad how much profanity somebody has to use to talk about how unfair it is that two teams don't get a frickin' rematch for the national championship game. The game has been played. OSU won. It's time to stop whining and move on.

And here's a few logical fallacies in your arguments.

Just because an SEC guy is braggin on the SEC doesn't make it true. If you don't think the SEC is the toughest football conference in the nation, you're both delusional and in the minority. We have more ranked teams than any other conference, not to mention the fact that the majority of the conference has gotten a national championship title in the past and the SEC usually has a team in the championship game.

Home field advantage doesn't mean anything in the rankings. It doesn't matter if you're at home, away, or on the moon, a win is a win and a loss is a loss. I'm sure it's counted in some abstract way in the coaches' and sportswriters' polls, and that's why they're counted in the rankings. But no matter how much you want it not to be counted because of homefield advantage, a loss is a loss is a loss, and you just have to deal with it.

Football players have classes, and if you don't think they have to worry about passing them, then you've been following some pretty dirty teams. I can't speak for anything else, but at Arkansas, if you don't pass the eligibility fair and square, you're off the team, no matter who you are. I've seen star players get kicked off the team for both cheating and for failing midterms.

It also doesn't matter when Michigan lost to Ohio State. The BCS isn't going to put two teams who have already played each other in the national championship game.

And no, it's not about having the two best teams in the final game. If that's the case, then there would be playoffs. The original purpose was to make sure that the best team in the country had to prove it. Not to mention the fact that statistically, Florida is better than Michigan. They're both 1-loss, and Florida had a tougher schedule.

And if half the words in your next post are profanity, like before, then this discussion is over.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

No, what's sad is how much non SEC guys fail to realize how tough it is to play in that conference. Florida is 12-1. Michigan is 11-1. Florida has played 4 ranked teams, all in conferance (Arkansas has played 6, 5 in conference). Michigan has played 2. Florida wins that ranking off of strength of schedule.

It's also sad how much profanity somebody has to use to talk about how unfair it is that two teams don't get a frickin' rematch for the national championship game. The game has been played. OSU won. It's time to stop whining and move on.

Oh yes, my post was littered with profanity.

As I said, Florida won a national championship on a rematch game.

And here's a few logical fallacies in your arguments.

Just because an SEC guy is braggin on the SEC doesn't make it true. If you don't think the SEC is the toughest football conference in the nation, you're both delusional and in the minority. We have more ranked teams than any other conference, not to mention the fact that the majority of the conference has gotten a national championship title in the past and the SEC usually has a team in the championship game.

The SEC conference IS a good conference. It's also the conference that consistently feels the need to remind everyone of it.

Home field advantage doesn't mean anything in the rankings. It doesn't matter if you're at home, away, or on the moon, a win is a win and a loss is a loss. I'm sure it's counted in some abstract way in the coaches' and sportswriters' polls, and that's why they're counted in the rankings. But no matter how much you want it not to be counted because of homefield advantage, a loss is a loss is a loss, and you just have to deal with it.

I'm fine with counting it, but to say we already had our shot at the title is absurd. Now, if the game was going to be played in Columbus, then go ahead Florida, it's your turn.

Football players have classes, and if you don't think they have to worry about passing them, then you've been following some pretty dirty teams. I can't speak for anything else, but at Arkansas, if you don't pass the eligibility fair and square, you're off the team, no matter who you are. I've seen star players get kicked off the team for both cheating and for failing midterms.

Are you seriously this naive? Do you KNOW what kind of "classes" your football players "take?" Good job trying to imply that Michigan is a dirty team, though.

It also doesn't matter when Michigan lost to Ohio State. The BCS isn't going to put two teams who have already played each other in the national championship game.

Which is retarded. And it absolutely does matter when your loss is.

And no, it's not about having the two best teams in the final game.

Well, at least you recognize and admit it.

If that's the case, then there would be playoffs. The original purpose was to make sure that the best team in the country had to prove it.

Oh really, when did you get THAT memo?

Not to mention the fact that statistically, Florida is better than Michigan. They're both 1-loss, and Florida had a tougher schedule.

And Florida lost by more points to the number 9 BCS team then Michigan did to the number 1 BCS team. Of course, that doesn't matter right? Both losses are equal to you, somehow. Strength of schedule only counts for wins; not losses. Right?

And if half the words in your next post are profanity, like before, then this discussion is over.

Quit being such a ninny. I said horseshit 4 times. Cussing goes with football; grow a sack

 

[Hobbit]

At this point, I think I'm just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think the national championship game should ever be a rematch. I think you've put up a few good arguments against that, but I still disagree. Just a couple of final points and that's it.

The idea of having a national championship game was a result of a lot of college ranking politics when the #2 teams would gripe a lot that they were better than the #1 team and that they'd prove it if they just got to play them. It went on for quite a while, until somebody had the bright idea to make it a bowl game to give one lower ranked team a chance to prove themselves, and the #1 team what was probably their toughest game of the year, to prove that they had truly earned their rankings. Disputes over standings, strength of schedule, and the quality of undefeated teams led to both the national championship game and overtime.

Margin of victory also isn't counted in most computer polls due to similar politicking. For the most part, a win's a win and a loss is a loss. This is because coachs used to have their teams pile on points in nothing games for increased standing, as well as a lot of gripings over highly defensive conferences, such as the SWC (and no, that's not a typo, I mean the old Southwestern Conference).

One last question. If Michigan and OSU had played each other at Michigan, would you still be this outraged that they're not in the title game?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

One last question. If Michigan and OSU had played each other at Michigan, would you still be this outraged that they're not in the title game?

Nope. If the game was on neutral territory, or the home team lost, I think that voids your shot at a rematch. I wouldn't even be all that upset about the way things turned out this year if everyone wasn't justifying Florida getting in because "it's somebody else's turn."

That was word for word Urban Meyer's entire argument.

The fact that everyone feels the need to justify their decision with such logic obviously implies many of them don't feel Florida is the better team, because otherwise they'd just say so.

 

[Hobbit]

Nope. If the game was on neutral territory, or the home team lost, I think that voids your shot at a rematch. I wouldn't even be all that upset about the way things turned out this year if everyone wasn't justifying Florida getting in because "it's somebody else's turn."

That was word for word Urban Meyer's entire argument.

The fact that everyone feels the need to justify their decision with such logic obviously implies many of them don't feel Florida is the better team, because otherwise they'd just say so.

I know it's gotta be frustrating for the Michigan fans, but the way the system works right now is that you can't rematch for the title, and the NCAA doesn't change its policy mid-season for any reason, not even out of fairness. Maybe this will be the next wake-up call for a policy change. After all, overtime was added after Texas finished a season at #3 when they deserved to be #1. The reason? In the final seconds of the game, Texas went for two after to win instead of just kicking it for a tie, and the Texas coach said he'd rather get third than settle for a tie just to hold his ranking.

And no, I'm not really arguing that Florida is the better team. Arkansas could have beaten Florida if they hadn't lost momentum from that dropped punt, and Arkansas isn't as good as Ohio State. However, Spurrier is known for pulling a few surprises, so it won't really shock me if Florida wins the title, though I don't expect it.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I know it's gotta be frustrating for the Michigan fans, but the way the system works right now is that you can't rematch for the title, and the NCAA doesn't change its policy mid-season for any reason, not even out of fairness. Maybe this will be the next wake-up call for a policy change. After all, overtime was added after Texas finished a season at #3 when they deserved to be #1. The reason? In the final seconds of the game, Texas went for two after to win instead of just kicking it for a tie, and the Texas coach said he'd rather get third than settle for a tie just to hold his ranking.

And no, I'm not really arguing that Florida is the better team. Arkansas could have beaten Florida if they hadn't lost momentum from that dropped punt, and Arkansas isn't as good as Ohio State. However, Spurrier is known for pulling a few surprises, so it won't really shock me if Florida wins the title, though I don't expect it.

Spurrier... you mean Meyer...right

 

[Hobbit]

Spurrier... you mean Meyer...right

Probably, I get coaches confused a lot.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The whole debate would be moot if they had a 4 or 8 team playoff but since its here, yes Michigan is the 2nd best team in the country. Their only loss on the year was to the best team in the country by 3 points. That puts them in the game. The fact that they both have to sit for 6 weeks without playing a game and then are expected to play for the national title is beyond ridiculous though.

College football will always be a stepchild in my eyes to NFL and College basketball because of it.

Wrong.

Michigan, like Notre Dame, was a poser.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Wrong.

Michigan, like Notre Dame, was a poser.

Can I laugh at you when your coach leaves for Michigan?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Can I laugh at you when your coach leaves for Michigan?

Feel free.

Its probably the only job he would ditch us for, and we'd understand it. By that time, Nick Saban might be sick of coaching a bunch of inbred rednecks with no teeth who can't hold their liquor and he might come groveling before us begging to again be part of Tiger Football.

But we wouldn't need him. Tiger Football is here to stay folks, its not about a single coach or a single player, or a single game or single year even. Its a self propagating process - Over the next couple of decades, LSU will even the score with numerous SEC opponents which it is losing to in all time matches, and win numerous SEC and National Championships.

We've already surpassed Alabama to hold the record for most number of Sugar Bowl appearances.