This isn't a playoff system

[TouchdownJesus]

I don't get the logic. A tiebreaker for a playoff spot is based first on head-to-head matchups. Just because ND may "redeem" themselves with a win in SC, they would still have the same record as Michigan.

Thats the whole problem though. This isn't a playoff system. This is a ranking system with certain unwritten rules that aren't always followed.

In a playoff system, Boise State would be #2 b/c its only based on wins and losses. I agree that head-to-head is a good tiebreaker, if its a playoff system. If ND and Mich are the only two 1-loss teams in America at the end, then and only then can we use head-to-head.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

People have said that Michigan shouldn't drop b/c they lost to the #1 team.

Lets look back to Iowa. They were unbeaten (4-0) and ranked 13th. They lost to #1 Ohio St. They quickly dropped to 19th. Shouldn't they have stayed at 13??? I'm confused.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

The reason I like my idea about 8 conferences with 12 teams each is b/c its about as fair as you can get. You know what has to be done at the beginning of the year and you control your own destiny.

Has anyone ever been dicked since the SEC and others started having conf. championship games? The conferences pre-determine tiebreakers, etc.

You compare all the apples in one conference and pick the best apple.
They get to go play for the nat'l title against the oranges and pears, etc.

 

[3 Seconds]

People have said that Michigan shouldn't drop b/c they lost to the #1 team.

Lets look back to Iowa. They were unbeaten (4-0) and ranked 13th. They lost to #1 Ohio St. They quickly dropped to 19th. Shouldn't they have stayed at 13??? I'm confused.

They lost by 21 @ home as opposed to 3 on the road. That is a huge difference.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

No, they both lost one game to the same team.

Why must we reward morale victories?

"Alright team, lets go out there and not get our ass kicked too bad"

 

[3 Seconds]

No, they both lost one game to the same team.

Why must we reward morale victories?

"Alright team, lets go out there and not get our ass kicked too bad"

No, one team lost by 21 @ home, 1 team lost by 3 on the road. That is not the same, completely different losses.

That is why one team dropped more than the other in a polling system.

Your arguement makes sense in the NFL where there are divisions and a playoff system. A loss is a loss.

When its all based off of a ranking system all losses are not equal. If the #3 team losses to the #87 ranked team & #4 team losses #2 ranked team are those losses equal???

 

[TouchdownJesus]

I'm just saying that if we're going to look at more than wins and losses, including strength of schedule and possibly home/away...

If we're going to look at more than that, then we need to scrutinize every single play of the game. Such as, 2 fluke fumbles by the OhioSt center and a questionable pass int. on the last drive, or Mich loses by at least 3 TD's. Or, find out when backups were in for certain games and teams scored against them to make the score closer.

A win is a win is a win. All we need to look at is who that win was against.

 

[3 Seconds]

I'm just saying that if we're going to look at more than wins and losses, including strength of schedule and possibly home/away...

If we're going to look at more than that, then we need to scrutinize every single play of the game. Such as, 2 fluke fumbles by the OhioSt center and a questionable pass int. on the last drive, or Mich loses by at least 3 TD's. Or, find out when backups were in for certain games and teams scored against them to make the score closer.

A win is a win is a win. All we need to look at is who that win was against.

Well we disagree on that. All wins are not equal.

I understand why you want to the case, but unfortuately for the Irish this year it isnt. Flukey plays happen to everyone & generally will equal out over a season.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

I'll agree to disagree. I can bend on home/away meaning something, but I honestly don't care if a team wins by 1 or 100, its just one win or one loss to me as far as any championship run.

I am more arguing against Michigan than for ND. I hate the system's inconsistency.

I also wonder...if Ohio State was 7-1 in the conf. and Mich was 6-2. Ohio State lost to MSU by 50. Mich lost to OhioSt and Wisc., each by a point....
I guess OhioSt wins the conference, but Mich is ranked ahead of them.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

Last year, ND was ranked fairly high with 2 losses, after the "loss" to USC. I think they were 8th, not sure.

There was enough crazy chit that could have happened, where teams could lose and ND could have gradually worked its way up to #2. But, anytime part of that scenario would happen, a team would leapfrog ND.

Why rank them so high, if its possible to leapfrog them just b/c they have 2 losses. The same team with the same rank with only one loss would move up.

I'm now hoping that teams leapfrog Mich b/c the voters don't want a rematch...but thats crap. Just like its crap to only drop Mich to 2nd/3rd. Just like it was crap to have teams leapfrog a winning 2-loss teams.

The hypocrisy leaves me speechless. Luckily I know how to type....lol.

 

[3 Seconds]

I'll agree to disagree. I can bend on home/away meaning something, but I honestly don't care if a team wins by 1 or 100, its just one win or one loss to me as far as any championship run.

I am more arguing against Michigan than for ND. I hate the system's inconsistency.

I also wonder...if Ohio State was 7-1 in the conf. and Mich was 6-2. Ohio State lost to MSU by 50. Mich lost to OhioSt and Wisc., each by a point....
I guess OhioSt wins the conference, but Mich is ranked ahead of them.

I hear ya, but now this example is different. You are now changing the forumla from a teams w/ different # of losses as opposed to have the same in the earlier example.

I am only saying that if Texas were to lose to say to Oklahoma by 3 pts on the road & had a 10-1 record & Florida also 10-1 but lost to Kentucky by 21 at home, all things like SoS being equal, that Flordia loss is much worse than the Texas loss & Texas would deserve to be the higher ranked team.

 

[Scott4USC]

Posters act like Ohio St. was suppose to go out and win by double digits. Ohio St. goal was to win the freaking game. By 1pt, 3pts, 7pts or 20pts. Just win the game.

Ohio St. did just that. THEY WON THE GAME! As a result, OSU gets a chance to play in the BCS NC game. That is what OSU EARNED for winning the game. That is their reward! Letting Michigan play in the BCS NC takes everything away from OSU winning that game.

Michigan had their opportunity, they came up short. OSU had their opportunity and they capitalized.

MICHIGAN LOST THE GAME! THEY WERE THE LOSER!

Why the hell would ANYBODY want to reward a LOSER a trip to the BCS NC game? Especially since that team who lost only has 3 wins all year against BCS teams with a winning record.

This Sat. USC's goal is to beat ND. By 1pt, 3pts, 7pts, or 20pts. Just beat ND. That is what you are suppose to do. GO OUT AND WIN!

 

[bryanz]

It will all play out, take it easy, I thought you west coast guys were kind of laid back, it's just a game. I do think USC will give the Buckeyes the best game, Ohio St is good but not a great team and Mich with a better coach and game plan could have won that game. Carr should have run the ball to keep Smith off the field. He had the tools to do it. Whether you run it or pass it against them you have to win the time battle and WEAR THEM DOWN. Pete would have beat Ohio st with Lloyd's team. Mich doesn't deserve another shot, they went into the shoe and played nice.

 

[bryanz]

I'll tell you, old school Big- 10 fans and players had to be disappointed in that Pansy showing from Lloyd's boys on Sat. They never got down and dirty on offense, they never staked their claim. Guys that talk about how soft the west coast game is, didn't have to look to far. They saw it from Mich. It's a good thing Bo was dead and on ice. He would have been hot, Lloyd never used his best weapon. All that talk about how they built this line to beat the Buckeyes, and they never pulled that club out of the bag and knocked some teeth in with it. I don't want to see that Pansy lead out those debs in maze in blue . I love the B -10, Ohio st is very good, and Mich could have been great, but they have Lloyd. If there was ever a day to run the ball, when you could, it was Saturday. They don't deserve another shot ! Tuck your tail and do what you will until you get rid of Ms Carr; wait till next year !

 

[TouchdownJesus]

I think it will "all play out" b/c I think OhioSt beats anyone in the country.
But that doesn't mean it truly does all work out. Several deserving teams aren't going to get a shot at the Buckeyes while Michigan may very well get 2shots in a row.

3Seconds...your right, my last example was pretty bad. A different scenario.

Overall, I also agree with Scott4. USC wants to beat Notre Dame. Thats the goal this Saturday.

Thats why I would never have a problem if a player bet on his team's ML. But if he bet on his team -3, thats different. Sometimes when you go for a blowout, you end up getting blown out.

There's so much that goes into every game. Look at BC/Maryland. Anyone watch that? First 2 possessions, Md fumbles and BC runs it in for TD. Completely changed the way Md had to play the whole game. Are those 2 fumble returns indicative of a whole season?

 

[TouchdownJesus]

I'm in ACC country and love Carolina. Of course ND is my "national" team. I still hate the day FSU joined ACC. At least UNC had a chance every year to win an inferior conference.
Now its not a big deal b/c theres so much more parity and FSU/Miami are temp. down.

Anyway, I've always thought SEC was best game in town since 1980 (when I was 7). Big 10 is prob. 2nd over the years.

OhioSt with Tressel is just dam hard to beat. The guy has enough talent every year to challenge for nat'l title and he plays good smart football. He plays field position, kicks FG's when needed to get a lead, plays the clock, etc.
Tressel and Troy Smith.....I doubt anyone beats them in January. I think Fla has best shot.

 

[Mags]

The team that will play Ohio State will be...

The team that will play Ohio State will be...

determined by the BCS....(as we all know)

It's the BCS job to find the top 2 teams - no matter what conference, or who they are...

If it is USC, so be it...

If it is Michigan, so be it....

If it is Florida (this is who I think it will be), so be it...


But whoever finishes 2nd in the BCS - well, they are the 2nd best team, so let's deal with it.

I do disagree with the comment that "a win is a win"..... if a team is favored by 35, and win by 1, that is a bad win - they did not meet expectations......

If you are a talented team - and perform to expectations - you should have a winning spread record, in my opinion....

MORE IMPORTANTLY - since this IS a gambling website, THAT IS REALLY ALL WE SHOULD CARE ABOUT, RIGHT?

I mean, a team that is 0-11 but is 11-0 against the spread, provided I was smart enough to bet on them, is the REAL winner in my estimation......

All the rest is entertainment... but $$$$ is what matters......

That being said, all I can say is "GO NOTRE DAME!"

(I'll admit I do not like Notre Dame, but I like them better than Scott4USC, so I'm rooting for ND! - as is a lot of the board, I'm sure)

 

[Scott4USC]

OhioSt with Tressel is just dam hard to beat. The guy has enough talent every year to challenge for nat'l title and he plays good smart football. He plays field position, kicks FG's when needed to get a lead, plays the clock, etc.
Tressel and Troy Smith.....I doubt anyone beats them in January. I think Fla has best shot.

Curious to what you think about Pete Carroll. He is even more successful than Tressel and plays tougher schedules. Which style do you prefer?

Reason I ask is PC has completely different approach. Not saying one is better than the other. Carroll never plays field position. Almost always goes for it on 4th down, even at around 50. Always goes for it inside the 50.

Carroll tries to NOT kick FG's. Often going for it on 4th down instead of kicking FG's. Except against CAL last week he opted for FG's on multiple occasions. Rarely does USC kick FG's on 4th down.

After USC gets the lead, they usually keep the pedal to the medal. Trying to bury the oppoent. Which leads to the next difference. PC usually does not play the clock. Keeping the attack mode on from start to finish.

All that said, maybe it will be USC and Pete Carroll and his different coaching style that can upset mighty Ohio St.

Michigan punted 2 times against Ohio St. Both I believe 4th and 1. That could be the difference why USC and PC are so successful. USC players have the mindset to go after it and take it. Against CAL, USC up 7, 4th and 2 on CAL 37, USC went for it and scored TD on 37 yard pass. BCS NC invite on the line. USC reached out and took it. Carr would have punted or attempted FG. Against a team like Ohio St. you must go out and grab it. You have to score TD's. Not play field position. Not kick field goals. Not be passive.

Not sure what you see in FL over USC. Also be curious to read that explanation. USC is young, and FL might be more experienced, but FL turns the ball over a lot. So experience not really an issue.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

Florida has played a tough schedule and hasn't given up more than 21 points all year (Auburn scored a TD off a botched hook/lateral on last play of game). Not to mention, Auburn scored on a blocked punt. Florida should be unbeaten right now.
I like Urban Meyer and think they can do some things with Leak/Tebow combination.

Florida had a chance to win on the last drive, but it was a long shot. Looking back....they were only down 3.
If they had just downed the ball and accepted the 3-point loss, they might ahead of Michigan for a shot at OSU.
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?
9 point loss is a bad loss. Good thing Auburn wasn't allowed to kick the PAT. Although, since every point counts, thats kind of crappy.

 

[TouchdownJesus]

As for Pete Carroll, I'll answer the best I can. First, esp. since last year's ND game....I hate the bastard.
Its hard to tell about the Pac-10, but to me it looks like the last 5+ years....USC is great. Cal is good, UCLA and Oregon are very average and everyone else sucks.
I know Pac-10 have more wide open offenses, but its like they don't even care about defense. Either that, or the defenses just suck.

Anyway, there are def. a lot of ways to win and I can't take that away from Carroll. But, lets see him play that same way in another conference. At USC, against Pac 10, he's just playing the odds.

He'll prob. get it since he's got a great off. against weak def. And, if he doesn't, his defense will prob stop them. Basically he has a team that can succeed on those risks or overcome them most of the time.
4th and 2 against Texas might have cost him nat'l championship.

Overall, its not my brand of football. Neither is Weis, but I like him a lot.