So...About this whole OhioSt/USC Fiesta Bowl...Congrats to UCLA - Huge Upset!
- 12-03-2006, 06:44 PM
- 12-03-2006, 06:48 PM
Originally Posted by Trauma1
Sorry - I really HATE that common mistake.
BTW - how many damn teams in the SEC use the xxx Bait chant? Jesus.
- 12-03-2006, 06:53 PM
Originally Posted by gators52
12-03-2006, 06:57 PM
12-03-2006, 07:40 PM
Always for the Big 10 in non-con, and even for Michigan in Big 10 games. An undefeated OSU/Michigan game is a dream, it is nice to spoil their season, and it helps OSU's sos.Originally Posted by jmh80
12-03-2006, 08:22 PM
12-03-2006, 08:32 PM
12-03-2006, 08:38 PM
Screw Lloyd Car...for all of those of you who were watching espn 2 and heard his comments...Bull****
12-03-2006, 08:40 PM
12-03-2006, 08:47 PM
No way @ Auburn.
It wasn't ND's deal that got them in RD. It was the 3 team rule. Come on now. I don't like the treatment ND gets because they are God's team or whatever - but this one (finally) wasn't their fault.
What did Lloyd say?
12-03-2006, 08:47 PM
12-03-2006, 08:50 PM
12-03-2006, 08:53 PM
He didn't even say anything about lloyd!! when they interviewd him he still kept saying that only a playoff would determine the true champion.Originally Posted by Rogue Drone
lloyd was saying how UF coaches were bathmouthing the Mich program, but I didn't hear them do that, and even if they did dont cry about it on natl tv. When they asked urban about lloyds comments he was gracefull and didn't undermind the Mich program at all.
12-03-2006, 08:53 PM
12-03-2006, 09:31 PM
Someone brought up on another board the matchups if we didn't have the BCS.
SC would play OSU* in the Rose and FLA would play Mich in the Sugar.
12-03-2006, 09:48 PM
The only people that wanted to see OSU vs. Umich were the people that wanted to see the best 2 teams in the country play. The people against it were in the "it's not fair" group, whether that meant 2 big 10 teams going, or that Umich already had it's chance against OSU, or that the SEC is so much better than the big 10 (it's not, don't give that rankings junk either... Rutgers #7 at one point!?! The SEC as a whole is overrated, they may be the best conference but by no means that much better).
Good luck Gators, you are going to need it.
12-03-2006, 10:15 PM
12-03-2006, 10:25 PM
Yes - I agree RD. The job Coker did is just purely amazing. A mere ~5 years ago (Jan. 2nd 2002) I was watching the greatest team in history destroy Nebraska - there Coker revealed himself for the first time, the infamous "lay down and play dead" happened in the 2nd half of that Rose Bowl.
I think we'll beat Nevada - just like BC. Coker will let the dogs out, he's got nothing to lose.
12-03-2006, 10:41 PM
I love how no one here gives any respect to the SEC, even if it does have 3 teams in the top 10. You will cry that Auburn is garbage etc, then say LSU is probably the best SEC team...a team that lost to Auburn. The Big 10 has 2 good teams and then wisconsin who didn't beat anyone all year along, everyone else iin the big 10 s around 6-6 middle of the pack kind of teams. SEC has 6 teams in the top 30. You guys can keep making excuses about how bad the SEC is "they ahve no offense". Ok well OSU and Mich game was a high scoring game, i could easily say "the big 10 has no defense" but i'm a realist and i know that's not true.
Heck look at my posts from a week ago, I was saying that USC deserved the NC bid over UF, i'm not just some crazy UF kid who says UF is the best team ever. Maybe one day you guys will come to love the SEC and realize this is how real football is played. Thats why you guys keep recruiting the speed demons bread in the south, speed kills and that the SEC's trademark.
12-03-2006, 11:07 PM
12-03-2006, 11:31 PM
People coming out of their holes tonight.
JT said he did not feel right voting this week and I think Carr and Meyer should have done the same.
12-04-2006, 12:22 AM
As I figured, Florida would get the nod. Not that it matters at this point - but I actually have done a 180 on the whole debate.
Michigan should probably play Ohio State for the national championship, based on the criteria of the BCS to decide the '2 best teams in the nation'. That is the criteria. It has nothing to do with finishing 2nd in your conference or if you have met prior. The most telling measure is that Michigan would be a 7.5 favorite if they met Florida on a neutral field.
I completely agree with Kirk Herbstreit he when says that the main reason Michigan is not playing in this game is because the voters did not want a rematch of two interconference teams. Based on that reason, Michigan is getting screwed. Again, the BCS is supposed to match the two best teams in the nation, regardless if they have played before. Had Texas not imploded, finished #2, and had a single loss (to Ohio State) - I don't think a rematch would be a big deal.
While it seems I've done a completely 180, it's more like a 120. I still don't think Michigan belonged on the field with Ohio State. But that field was in Columbus and Michigan gave a fairly decent effort in a very hostile environment.
A popular reason that there should be no rematch was: it will 'waterdown' the Big Ten Ohio State-Michigan rivalry. The opposite is actually true, it would fuel it. Had the first game been in Ann Arbor, and the Buckeyes' won - the talk of a rematch would be dead.
There is some truth to Michigan being idle and thus falling in the polls. Had they played Northwestern and Purdue, for example, in the prior 2 weeks... and won by a significant margin, they would have remained at #2 - only to fall to #3 if Southern Cal beat UCLA.
With that said, Michigan should probably be playing Ohio State on January the 8th. However, the Gators are obviously not undeserving. I believe Michigan would have been there if they had replaced their November 4th meeting vs. Ball State, with a reasonable team from a major conference (some ACC team, Wake or Georgia Tech) to be played earlier in the year.
A side note is, Oklahoma would be in all this debate too if they didn't get robbed at Oregon. They lost their starting QB and heisman candidate RB.. yet should only have 1 loss.
12-04-2006, 12:27 AM
Originally Posted by BingeAndPurge
I agree, however I'm going to guess that Carr and Meyers' votes cancelled each other's out. Unless Carr is that big of a p_ssy.
12-04-2006, 12:31 AM
this is all in hindsight though, Iowa and Penn State were projected to be top 20 teams and they are no where to be found. Michigan State also could have been top 25 (we are strictly going by preseason expectation).Originally Posted by CEDeoudes59
okay, im done talking to myself on here
12-04-2006, 12:42 AM
If your going to go that route then you have to do the same for UF, who knew georgia and FSU were going to suck it up this year. Even UCF was predicted to have a breakout year.Originally Posted by CEDeoudes59
Mich doesnt deserve go, they had their shot. You also said Mich would be a 7pt favorite over UF? Well Ohio opened up at a 7.5 pt favorite against UF (I think this will climb to 9.5 then I will hammer the gators). With simple subraction that would make OSU only a .5 favorite over Mich which doesn't make any sense. Michigan had few quality wins enough said, UF had a higher margin of victory. Of course thats couting w. carolina but Ball st is a walk in the park too.
12-04-2006, 12:53 AM
same, I hope USC can get up for Michigan.
I think Michigan will have the formula to stopping the Trojan offense and should a 9 point favorite. USC doesn't play well in the north-side of LA. F_cking Pasedena, we are 1-2 there in 2 years.
12-04-2006, 01:01 AM
Right I said it was in hindsight. The SEC Championship validated Florida, as it should have. Without Arkansas on their resume and the conference championship.. UF is still ranked #4. I'll give them credit there.Originally Posted by gators52
But this is the argument that needed to be thrown out. By that logic, Florida needs to play at Ohio State for the national championship. Michigan had their chance, but it wasn't in Glendale, AZ. It was at Ohio State.Originally Posted by Gators52
The projection was Michigan a +7.5 favorite against Florida. That doesn't mean Ohio State would be a +15 favorite over Florida. The pollsters compare Michigan and Ohio State fairly similar on paper, same sort of balanced offense and good run defense.
12-04-2006, 01:18 AM
USC seems to have trouble against mobile QBs. even Brady Quinn ran for 63 yards on them
the UCLA-USC game came down simply to a lack of a maturity on the part of USC. Minus a few of a the veterans that wanted the game badly, everyone else was waiting for each other to make a play. It was the same attitude in the Oregon State game. Still, it gets me excited for next season, the younger players. I think we will start the year at #2, perhaps, #1. West Virginia might honestly be #1. But I'm thinking Texas for #1.
We were first and goal and JD Booty threw an interception at the very end. We could have won it.
12-04-2006, 01:36 AM
I have allready mentioned that in this thread.Originally Posted by Rogue Drone
I was 10 years old at the time I dont know what the exact circumstances were at that point, but I do know a couple teams had to lose in the last week of the season for UF to get that shot, just like this year. UCLA is my 2nd favorite team now by the way.
To CED why do they have trouble with running QB's? Do they play a lot of man coverage, mobile QB's eat that up with their legs.
12-04-2006, 02:55 AM
They didn't have a lot of trouble with Cowan (UCLA), per say - they only allowed 13points. That's the second least amount of points allowed all year I believe by SC.
Vince Young was another story. USC had walk-ons starting on defense in the Rose Bowl... compounded with them playing their worst game all year and almost winning. No team has beat USC by more than 6 (i think) in 4 years.
It wasn't announced who was to be the starter for UCLA (Cowan or Oslen [lefty]) until mid-day friday WesternStandardTime).. so Cowan gave SC a bit of a curve ball. Still, USC could have won by 14-13 or 90-13. My point is, the defense did their job but Pete Carroll and Lane Kiffin (douchebag offensive cordinator) refused to keep a tight end in to block. USC (like Michigan) do not run any plays from the shotgun, so Booty didn't have much of a chance.
USC was outcoached and outplayed, and only lost by 4. They need to admit it and stop living in denial that these losses at Oregon St and UCLA were just complete flukes. The coaching staff needs to take responsibility for this loss and use half-time to make adjustments instead of offering the players the advice of "play harder". They seemed to do that in the Cal game but for whatever reason didn't respect UCLA enough to do the same. This is going to turn into a "Mack Brown" football team, where we get the best athletes and always underachieve.
To SC's credit, John David Booty was the only first year starter of the major contending BCS teams. He was excellent at times. SC's runningbacks included 2 true freshman and another first year starter Chauncey Washington (dumb idiot, had been acdemically ineligible for 3 years - don't like him, can you tell?). Was named the starter because he was tight with Carroll, Bush and Lendale. The O-Line graduated 3 players to the pros. 19 True Freshman played this year.
all of this gives me optimism for 2007. but next year, nothing less than a national championship will do
12-04-2006, 12:36 PM
I dunno if this has already been mentioned, sorry if it has...but the big ten really needs a bye week or a conference championship game in there somewhere, having no games for michigan for this long really hurts them
12-04-2006, 02:50 PM
They don't need a championship, they need to drop Northwestern from the Big 10. Some teams are scheduling ooc games instead of the bye week. Also, someone made a good point on Rome today that I ahppen to agree with. If USC beats UCLA and keeps the 2 spot, Florida does not jump Michigan in the polls.Originally Posted by warnerve
12-04-2006, 03:09 PM
I meant moreso that they should adjust their schedule so they aren't done for the season two weeks before the other teams in contention.Originally Posted by BingeAndPurge
12-04-2006, 08:19 PM
12-04-2006, 10:00 PM
I TOTALLY agree with CED. I just got off the phone with a good friend of mine - a UT Vol fan. He agrees that the BCS's job is putting together the 2 best teams - not the 2 most deserving teams.
We both agree that FLA probably deserved it more - but that they are not better than Michigan.
I agree that Michigan got robbed by having the OSU* game 2 weeks before the conf. championshipt games. If that game was yesterday - Michigan is going to Az. to play OSU* again.
RD - totally agree on a B10 championship game. Do what the ACC did - put the 2 natural big rivals (FSU and Miami) on opposite sides and have them play in the regular season. Sure - it's harder, but isn't that what winning a MNC is all about???
As an aside - the Capital One bowl of Wisky and Arky will go along way in the hindsight argument. If Wisky wins - then Michigan for sure got jobbed. If Arky wins - then FLA probably has the "right" to play OSU*.
This is just all so rediculous. Put LSU vs. OSU* in the Rose on Jan 2nd with FLA vs. Mich in the Sugar on Jan 1st. Then - play the winners on Jan 8th in the Fiesta.
It ain't that hard people.
12-04-2006, 10:07 PM
Another thing - the notion that the regular season is the playoffs is pure horsesh*t.
If it were the playoffs - each team should be REQUIRED to schedule one other top 25 ranked OOC team.
Not SW Louisiana St U (LSU) or any of the patsies FLA plays (I won't hear the FSU argument - if you can't see that they will be terrible with Bobby Bowden as HC, then...well, I don't know what to tell ya) or merely Notre Dame every year (Michigan - you guys used to schedule OOC teams x-ND, remember Colorodo?? What happened to that??)
This whole "who is more deserving" argument is stoooooopid because neither team has a good OOC win. Neither - ND and FSU do not count (not that Miami would this year either - but more often than not, it would be).
I won't fault the likes of Louisville (outside of forward thinking Cane fans - no one thought we'd lose 6) or Tennessee (Cal just played flat on D) or even OSU* (a frosh QB and a D that would eventually yield 49 freaking points to freaking Kansas ST???).
So - come on folks. If we are going to claim that the regular season count - make it for real. Like a real playoff. Play some good OOC teams damn it. Stop scheduling all these patsies.
12-05-2006, 12:23 AM
Originally Posted by jmh80
Yea cmon athletic directors your supposed to predict the future and know what teams will be good. I mean FSU? man they are never any good. ND with the best QB in the nation...na we scheduled them b/c we thought they were a cupcake. Get real man you can't predict these kind of things. FSU and ND are both great programs. You were complaning earlier about UF not scheduling Miami, well if they did you would now be comlaining that miami sucks balls and that UF just scheduled them b/c they are an easy OOC game. You cant have it both ways.
12-05-2006, 02:00 AM
I'm serious, and maybe it wasn't a set thing, that The Game used to be played the 4th Saturday of November. I think I've read it somewhere, but mainly I think this because my mom did arts and crafts and one of her big shows was the Sat and Sun after Thanksgiving every year and I remember it always being during the Michigan game. In fact, the show was at the Aladin Shrine Temple, and the old shriners (the old guys that wear funny hats) who worked the event sat and watched the game on their little black and white TV's.Originally Posted by Rogue Drone
12-05-2006, 02:29 AM
Trojans will finish #2 if they beat Michigan and Ohio State wins!
I'm still proud of them, the most true freshman playing and the most injuries in the nation, minus Stanford.
Damn Stanford nerds, don't they know taking steroids will put them in the hospital?!?
12-05-2006, 02:52 AM
Once upon a time, JMH, you used to harp on me about how bad Miami beat Florida... and I wouldn't get upset nor did I know the Florida football history. See, I'm not really a Gator fan - still, they are my 2nd or 3rd favorite team (I like Hawaii a lot). Yet, I still feel Michigan is better than Florida, and by a slim margin should play Ohio State again (strickly based on the criteria of what the BCS was created for).Originally Posted by jmh80
The BCS and 'the two best teams' is a concept that is hard to understand though. Say Ohio State had lost by some fluke to Northern Illinois week 1, but ran the table afterward, smashing every team, including Michigan. We would still rank them over Florida and Michigan.. and we would also consider them 'better' than Florida, though their resume would not indicate that.
This is where I get confused, although it help USC quite a bit. USC lost to Oregon State and only fell to #9. USC fell to #6 by losing to unranked UCLA. The Oregon State loss should probably have dropped USC to #19 or #20. Yet they were #9 and later became #2 because they didn't fall very far after the Oregon State loss. *granted the loss was only by 2.
By what if Louisville didn't barely lose to Rutgers? The National title game would be Louisville and Ohio State. Nobody will argue that Louisville is the second best team in the nation. That is a joke, but it almost happened.
Similar Forum Threads
- By custom in forum NutraplanetReplies: 36Last Post: 10-01-2012, 04:22 PM
- By KBD in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 01-08-2011, 08:37 PM
- By Blesum in forum Male Anti-Aging MedicineReplies: 18Last Post: 04-10-2007, 11:40 AM
- By NickyNoNames in forum General ChatReplies: 14Last Post: 07-23-2006, 10:51 AM
- By wheystation in forum Weight LossReplies: 9Last Post: 06-24-2005, 02:37 PM