BCS Rankings

[Scott4USC]

How is letting the Ohio State/Michigan loser into the NC game with 1 loss any different than letting USC in? You say "You reward losers"... isn't SC a loser also?

If you send the losing team in the OSU/MICHIGAN game to the BCS NC, you are rewarding a team for LOSING. Get it? You are sending that "LOSER" to the BCS NC game.Shouldn't you send a team who won at the end of the season. USC #3 BCS and ND #5 BCS and both have killer SOS's. Especially USC!

And, you talk about strength of schedule.. .let's say Michigan beats Ohio State... who went into Texas and beat them handily... do you really think it won't be Michigan and Ohio State for the NC?

USC has much better SOS than either OSU or Michigan. USC also has more quality wins than either OSU or Michigan. Doesn't matter. USC has better resume than BOTH OSU and Michigan. As long as USC wins out.

I think SC's ONLY chance is for Ohio State to beat Michigan handily....if Ohio State wins a close one, or if Michigan pulls the upset, it will be Ohio State-Michigan....

Nope!

IMHO, it won't be USC anyway - I don't think they can beat both ND and Cal anyway....

That is why USC is "IN" if they do win out. Brutal schedule with so many quality wins!

 

[CWood97]

Scott,

Do you believe USC was deserving of the #2 ranking they received after LOSING to Texas last year in the Rose Bowl? Just curious.

Also, you are a Sagarin guy, so you must believe in margin of victory as it relates to team strength. Does UM's 26 pt win ON THE ROAD mean anything at the end of the year? Let's keep in mind this is essentially the same ND team that nearly beat Leinert and company last year. Wasn't it you who argued that game was close because South Bend was such a hostile environment? Michigan went into that environment and dominated wire to wire.

I think a one loss USC deserves the benefit of the doubt over a one loss Michigan or OSU (or any one loss SEC team), simply for the fact I think SC is a deserving team despite the bad loss. They would have three high quality wins (Ark, Cal, ND) and some good mid-level wins (Neb, Oregon). However, even if ND pulls off the upset in LA, they shouldn't have a shot. That'll give them 1 high quality win (USC), and mid-level win (GT), near losses @MSU (collapse by Sparty) and vs UCLA (w/ backup QB) not to mention an absolute whipping in their own stadium at the hands of UM.

 

[Mags]

Scott

Scott

The response I expected from you....

Labelling Ohio State/Michigan a loser, due to losing their last game against the top team in the nation

While labelling USC a winner, just because they lost 3-4 weeks ago....

Either way, both will have a loss.... yes, USC NC schedule has been tough - but it makes up for a weak PAC 10 (other than Cal, who is decent)

If USC went into ND and won by 26, maybe I'd feel different... but they went in there last year with a much better team and was lucky to win.

We'll see what happens.. that's what makes this debate fun....

Probably won't matter in a couple of weeks, as I'm sure a bunch of top 10 teams will lose again... and Michigan/Ohio State/Wisconsin/West Virginia will all be sitting with 1 loss...

If it ain't Michigan, I wouldn't be surprised to see West Virginia sneak in if they end up beating Rutgers... or it could be Rutgers (did I really say that??)

 

[Mags]

Someone mentioned Sagarin awhile ago..

Someone mentioned Sagarin awhile ago..

I always thought the Sagarin ratings did a pretty good job....

Here is their top 15 as of now:

1. Ohio State
2. Michigan
3. Louisville
4. USC
5. California
6. West Virginia
7. LSU
8. Rutgers
9. Florida
10. Texas
11. Wisconsin
12. Notre Dame
13. Boise State
14. Arkansas
15. Tennessee

Interesting to see Wisconsin ranked ahead of Notre Dame AND Arkansas.....

How come nobody is giving Louisville a chance at the NC, given these rankings???

And my apologies to Scott4USC on the USC conference schedule.... Here is the top 5 conferences, based on Sagarin:

1. Pac 10
2. Big East
3. SEC
4. Big 10
5. ACC

Interesting that Big East is #2, while most people is slamming this overall conference... somewhat surprising....

Also interesting to see the Big 10 so low....

We'll see what BCS looks in a couple of weeks.. should be interesting...

 

[TouchdownJesus]

^^^^

"then ND should get in a conference before they talk national championship"


EXACTLY. I was just repeating what I had written when I talked about my idea for a playoff system.
Notre Dame would join the Big10 and it would then have 2 divisions, each with 6 teams.

Also, its times like this where I miss the old "bowl tie-ins". I mean, if you aren't going to have a playoff, then why not have 3-5 teams playing for the nat'l title on New Years Day???

Let USC or Cal go to the Rose Bowl and play Mich/OSU winner. That could be the nat'l title game.
Ark/Fla would go to the Sugar and play Notre Dame b/c they would have just invited the Irish after the big win against Air Force w/o any regard as to what they do against USC.

I love the fact that we've got a lot of big games coming up. Its just a big fat unfair pennant race.

And I hate to admit it, but if USC wins out, then I have no problem seeing them play OSU/Mich winner for title. But it does leave Ark/Fla winner on the outside as well as Rutgers.

 

[Taximike]

Those are some lame ass ratings if louisville is rated 3 and way ahead of rutgers who beat them, and have 0 losses.:shrug: DUH

 

[TouchdownJesus]

So, Rutgers just beat L'ville, is unbeaten, and in the same conference...yet L'ville is 3rd and Rutgers is 8th...

Is that a typo?

I guess ND should be #1, right ahead of Michigan...

 

[Scott4USC]

Scott,

Do you believe USC was deserving of the #2 ranking they received after LOSING to Texas last year in the Rose Bowl? Just curious.

YES! Texas beat USC by 3pts, USC blew double digit 4th quarter lead, USC shot themselves in foot over and over, AND Refs blew 2 huge calls that went in Texas favor. REFS and NCAA Publicly admitted it! If USC was BLOWN out by Texas, then maybe USC doesn't deserve #2 ranking.

Also, you are a Sagarin guy, so you must believe in margin of victory as it relates to team strength. Does UM's 26 pt win ON THE ROAD mean anything at the end of the year? Let's keep in mind this is essentially the same ND team that nearly beat Leinert and company last year. Wasn't it you who argued that game was close because South Bend was such a hostile environment? Michigan went into that environment and dominated wire to wire.

Yes that was an impressive win for Michigan I do factor in margin of victory. BCS computers do not.

I think a one loss USC deserves the benefit of the doubt over a one loss Michigan or OSU (or any one loss SEC team), simply for the fact I think SC is a deserving team despite the bad loss. They would have three high quality wins (Ark, Cal, ND) and some good mid-level wins (Neb, Oregon).

I agree.

However, even if ND pulls off the upset in LA, they shouldn't have a shot. That'll give them 1 high quality win (USC), and mid-level win (GT), near losses @MSU (collapse by Sparty) and vs UCLA (w/ backup QB) not to mention an absolute whipping in their own stadium at the hands of UM.

I never said you can't make an argument against ND. But I am not in favor of rewarding a team who just lost to play in the BCS NC. ND beating USC @USC is very impressive.

Look at it this way. IF ND can beat USC @USC, they have a "shot" at beating Ohio St. on neutral field. Michigan had their shot and lost. So who should go? Give another team a shot at beating OSU. That team should be ND if they can travel across the country and beat USC @USC where USC has the nations longest home win streak.

Now if a 1 loss Michigan did not play OSU, then of course Michigan deserves it over ND based on head to head.

My take is Michigan gets there shot on Sat. You don't get 2 chances to beat a team 1 time.

 

[CWood97]

My take is Michigan gets there shot on Sat. You don't get 2 chances to beat a team 1 time.

This is not an argument for ND, it is an argument against UM. If you are excluding UM for the sake of preventing a rematch, then you exclude ND and include the Rutgers/WVU winner or a one loss SEC team.

 

[CWood97]

YES! Texas beat USC by 3pts, USC blew double digit 4th quarter lead, USC shot themselves in foot over and over, AND Refs blew 2 huge calls that went in Texas favor. REFS and NCAA Publicly admitted it! If USC was BLOWN out by Texas, then maybe USC doesn't deserve #2 ranking.

Fine. If Michigan loses a close game on the last posession ON THE ROAD @ consensus #1 OSU, should voters rank them #2? (refs aside, let's keep in mind USC lost in their hometown, vs #2 Texas)

 

[Franky Wright]

lol. Yeah, I know....I'm VERY biased being an Irish fan. And now these 1-loss teams can do nothing more than play spoiler to other 1-loss teams.

TDJ,
My comment was referring to this whole thread in general, it just happened to be under one of your posts:SIB No big deal...........

I do however find all of this amusing, if somewhat more annoying? :com: I wish the threads were in the fans/teams section, cause they tend to take over the handicapping section of NCAA football at this time of year:nono: ..............

Franky

 

[Penguinfan]

So, let me get this straight Scott, and I'm honestly trying to see your side of things here, but it seems to me WHEN a team loses is more important than WHO they lose to according to you.

Ohio St's win against Texas means nothing to you, but USC losing by one point to an unranked team is vital?

For Ohio St to win the title they have to beat the #2 team twice, Michigan this week and whomever in the BCS game, finishing with zero losses

For USC to win the NC they simply have to beat the #1 team once and finish with one loss, again, to an unranked team.

Perhaps here I will show off my lack of knowledge, but how many National Champions in the past have had a loss to an unranked team, is it several? I really don't know.

 

[Scott4USC]

So, let me get this straight Scott, and I'm honestly trying to see your side of things here, but it seems to me WHEN a team loses is more important than WHO they lose to according to you.

Who you lose too, where you lost (road/home), why you lost, and when you lost.

Ohio St's win against Texas means nothing to you, but USC losing by one point to an unranked team is vital?

USC won @arkansas who has legit chance at being top 5 BCS team at end of year. USC beat ND when they were ranked #5 BCS. Ohio St. has Michigan who would be current #2 BCS but then drop. In the end, USC will have a lot more quality wins than either of the loser between Michigan/Ohio St. OSU winning @Texas is impressive, but OSU does not have the resume USC has. (if they lose to Michigan) USC will have the most wins of any team in the country against BOWL TEAMS! IMPRESSIVE!

For Ohio St to win the title they have to beat the #2 team twice, Michigan this week and whomever in the BCS game, finishing with zero losses

Yeah, but USC will have beaten more quality opponents to get to the BCS NC. USC much tougher SOS. USC resume more impressive and I def. would argue more difficult to get there than Ohio St. Doesn't mean USC is the better team.

For USC to win the NC they simply have to beat the #1 team once and finish with one loss, again, to an unranked team.

Again, look at what USC has accomplished and you will change your tune. (if USC wins out)

Perhaps here I will show off my lack of knowledge, but how many National Champions in the past have had a loss to an unranked team, is it several? I really don't know

I don't really care. Doesn't mean anything.

Great example. Which scenario is more impressive.

Michigan beats Northwestern and loses to Ohio St.

Michigan loses to Northwestern and beats Ohio St.

:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:

USC this season beat all the top quality opponents and lost to an average opponent. USC will have played the #1 strength of schedule. USC didn't lose any of their top 5 toughest games. USC lost on the road to an average team where USC had 4 turnovers and gave up a punt return TD ON THE ROAD. Yet USC only lost by 2pts with a failed 2pt attempt. USC did NOT lose because they were outplayed. USC beat themselves. QUITE OBVIOUS!

 

[Penguinfan]

USC lost on the road to an average team where USC had 4 turnovers and gave up a punt return TD ON THE ROAD. Yet USC only lost by 2pts with a failed 2pt attempt. USC did NOT lose because they were outplayed. USC beat themselves. QUITE OBVIOUS!

On everything but this I can at least partly agree, but how you lose doesn't matter to anyone, it's that you lost that counts.

 

[Mags]

So, Rutgers just beat L'ville, is unbeaten, and in the same conference...yet L'ville is 3rd and Rutgers is 8th...

Is that a typo?

I guess ND should be #1, right ahead of Michigan...

No, it's not a typo. Sagarin puts a lot of emphasis on strength of schedule..... The poll must view Lousville's schedule to be a lot tougher than Rutgers, I guess....

But I'm sure Rutgers will jump once they play WV....(strength of schedule I mean)

 

[TouchdownJesus]

Franky Wright, no problem, I just misunderstood.
I like the discussion in this forum simply b/c I rarely go to the "fav teams" or whatever.

But I also like it when it stays in one long thread and doesn't dominate the board.

My main argument is against the system and not the teams.

For this year, just no OSU/Mich rematch unless it goes into OT. Then perhaps a rematch, b/c I don't respect the college OT rules.