BCS resumes of one loss teams...

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:16 pm

Not that I want a rematch, but what other team can beat this resume?

Beat the #6 and #12 teams by a combined 40 points.

Only loss is to the undisputed #1 team in their crib by 3 points.

If the goal is to pit the two best teams in the title game how can it not be UM/OSU ?

I will say it again, I'm on record against a rematch. This would be a great year for a plus one scenario.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:30 pm

I like the wins, but the loss is not a good one...if it's possible to have a good loss that is. Hell ask ND about the SC game last year.

So if ND wins next week USC is toast, and ND can't lay claim for obvious reasons. If SC wins, they have a compelling arguement, but for the bad-loss.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:30 pm

Well, if SC beats ND also, we can cancel out ND.

So, now we can compare the strength of a win over Wisconsin versus wins over Cal, Arkansas, Oregon, and Nebraska. These wins cover teams from three different BCS conferences.

Plus SC will have finished 1st in their conference, Michigan 2nd.

SC wins.

Seems pretty clear to me.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:31 pm

By the the time the season is over a one loss USC team will have a far more impressive resume than a one loss Michigan team.

USC's SOS is just off the charts compared to Michigan's.

Ball St, Vandy and Central Michigan, all at home?? Iowa, Indiana, Michigan St, Minnesota, Northwestern and Penn St were also all down this year.

All Michigan has are wins over ND (which USC would also have) and the otherwise thoroughly untested Wisconsin.

There's just no way to compare such a weak S.O.S. to USC's.

Also, even though it's not a RULE it oughtta be: If you didn't even win your own conference you can't play for the national title, especially not when there are other teams out there from equally well regarded conferences with the same amount of losses who DID win their conference.

The Big 12 twice tought us that lesson with the way their non conference winners represented in the national title game.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:39 pm

Also, regarding USC's "bad loss", let's not let the facts get in the way of perception here, folks...

Oregon St is NOT a bad team. USC losing a squeaker at Corvallis is NOT like Auburn losing BIG at home to Georgia, for instance.

Oregon St is 7-4. They may very well end the season with nine wins. They're definitely bowl bound. Oregon St would likely finish no worse than fourth in the Big 10 this season.

They had that game in Corvallis.

No, it wasn't like losing to OSU at The Horseshoe, obviously, but then Oregon St also isn't USC's rivalry game either. Michigan had EVERY motivation to play their best game of the season in their one loss, and that was even before Bo died.

Just sayin'...

USC's loss isn't that bad and USC's wins more than trump Michigan's, if USC wins out.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:47 pm

What if Florida wins out?

I don't think it's only a 2 horse race.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:52 pm

I have no problem with Michigan playing Ohio State for the BCS title in 7 weeks even if USC wins out. This is a rebuilding year at USC and Id rather see Florida (if they beat Arkansas in the SEC title game) come out west to play in the Rose Bowl vs the Trojans, then we can put this Pac 10 SEC thing to rest. After yesterdays game, I still think Michigan is the #2 team in the nation.
USC will need to beat Notre Dame by 30+ to change my opinion of that.
Did you see Quinn and the Irish fans after their game vs Army chanting "beat SC", talk about being in someones domes

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:58 pm

I'm convinced that UofM is the 2nd best team in the country. Look at it this way...

OSU is the #1 team w/out any argument. The #2 team just played them to within 3 pts. in a see-saw battle. If they played the consensus #1 team that closely, how can anyone NOT think of them as the #2 team?

I'll be real interested to see how the pollsters rank UofM this week. I'll bet at least a few of 'em keep UofM at #2.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:04 pm

especially when they played at the #1 teams house, if that game was at Michigan or a neutral site, the outcome may have been very different

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:04 pm

WolverineSteve wrote:What if Florida wins out?

I don't think it's only a 2 horse race.

USC's S.O.S. would still be better, as would their "style points", and esepcially their attractiveness to the pollsters. This is trebled by the prospect getting a traditional (and absolutely killer) Big 10/Pac 10 Rose Bowl style match up for all the marbles.

Otherwise, yeah, I'm with SoCalTrjn, at this moment in time. Right now, I'd rank Michigan over USC. That won't necessarily be the case though if USC keeps improving and they look good first against a thoroughly motivated one loss ND team that still thinks they have a shot at all the marbles themselves and then they follow that one up with a second consecutive rivalry game on the road against UCLA...a team who MUST beat USC to become bowl eligible...a team whose entire season would be salvaged by beating their hated cross town rival.

USC still has TWO rivalry games to come. That matters.

By that point I know USC will have ran through a much tougher schedule than Michigan did and I might also then be inclined to think that USC is the better team.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:06 pm

The #2 team just played them to within 3 pts. in a see-saw battle. If they played the consensus #1 team that closely, how can anyone NOT think of them as the #2 team?

First off...see-saw? Did you even watch the game? After Michigan's first go-ahead score, which didn't last long, OSU had total control of the game, and never lost it. UofM stayed somewhat close, score-wise, but there was no "see-sawing" going on. OSU maintained a 4-11 point lead the majority of the game.

Secondly, it sounds like some people want to reward Michigan simply for having OSU on their schedule.

Yeah, they played them tough. I think most of us expected that in a 1v2, heated rivalry. I just don't see why we're supposed to accept Michigan as the best one loss team on the strength of a win over ND and Wisconsin, and on a loss to OSU. I refuse to believe that the best a team can do versus OSU is lose by three points. That might be true, but why just settle on it as fact? Let's see what kind of effort a team like SC, UF, or Arkansas can muster.

I think someone can put up at least an equal test.

How will we ever know if you're advocating for it not to happen?

FLW Buckeye · Post by **FLW Buckeye** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:08 pm

Ken wrote:I'm convinced that UofM is the 2nd best team in the country. Look at it this way...

OSU is the #1 team w/out any argument. The #2 team just played them to within 3 pts. in a see-saw battle. If they played the consensus #1 team that closely, how can anyone NOT think of them as the #2 team?

I'll be real interested to see how the pollsters rank UofM this week. I'll bet at least a few of 'em keep UofM at #2.

My guess is that the BCS will have scUM falling to 3rd or 4th. Anything more is an injustice. My top 3 is tOSU, SC, scUM.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:12 pm

It almost doesn't matter where the BCS stands this week, not when USC, ND, Florida and Arkansas all still have their make-or-break games to come...

The only thing we know for certain is that ND is out. At this point they're simply angling for the best non title game BCS bowl they can get. They might not think so, but that's the reality.

The race for #2 is now a four team sprint down the back stretch between USC, Michigan, Florida and Arkansas...with Arkansas praying that USC pulls up lame.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:17 pm

Agree, With Michigan losing to Ohio State, Notre Dame is out of the BCS title game hunt.
The next best BCS bowl is the Rose based on payout and years in existance, with Ohio State and Michigan then going to the BCS Title game and USC having already clinched one half of the Rose Bowl, dont look for the rose comittee to have a second rematch BCS bowl.
Notre Dame would go to the Fiesta and likely play the winner of Nebraska-Texas, even if they win out

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:32 pm

Now, one re-match I wouldn't mind seeing would be Michigan-ND...in the Rose Bowl. That could only happen by ND beating USC and Florida beating out Michigan to get into the title game.

Still...ND, in a Rose Bowl? Against Michigan?

Me likey!

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:35 pm

didnt you just say you were against rematches?

rematches happen a lot to teams in 12 team conferences, Texas may have to play Nebraska again this year.

of all the 1 loss teams out there, Michigan appears to be the best of them, if USC beats Notre Dame by 40 and Arkiansas and Nebraska both with their conference championship games, maybe Ill think USC should play in the Title game, if all of those things dont happen, then Michigan desereves a second shot.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:39 pm

I know it's stretching it to say so early, because much would have to fall into place still, but if SC winds up beating TWO BCS conference champions in the regular season, I don't see how you could pass them up.

If Michigan gets "snubbed," well, dem be the breaks when you choose to schedule CMU, Ball St, and Vandy OOC.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:40 pm

USC will also have to beat a BCS bound Independent

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:44 pm

SoCalTrjn wrote:didnt you just say you were against rematches?

Yes, I did.

Title games...consecutive game rematches.

ND-Michigan as a re-match though, that'd be a different kettle of fish. We're talking Week 2 here, not this week. We're NOT talking the title game.

We're talking a thoroughly pissed off ND team who'd undoubtedly feel they got jobbed out of the title game. We're talking a thoroughly pissed off ND team getting paired with the team that embarrassed them and took their title game chances away. We're talking a Michigan team with nothing else to play for since they lost The Big One...but then to look across the field at The Rose Bowl (which is in the DNA of any Michigan player) and see...Notre freaking Dame??

Notre Dame, of all people, showing up in...The Rose Bowl??

That's about as compelling of a non title game match up as possible, for BOTH teams. That'd be an eye opener for Michigan. That'd wake 'em up.

rematches happen a lot to teams in 12 team conferences, Texas may have to play Nebraska again this year.

True, due to the CCG set up. It's so often a shitty, anti climactic game too, innit? And even when it's not it so often accomplishes nothing more than to damage the conference in the BCS.

of all the 1 loss teams out there, Michigan appears to be the best of them, if USC beats Notre Dame by 40 and Arkiansas and Nebraska both with their conference championship games, maybe Ill think USC should play in the Title game, if all of those things dont happen, then Michigan desereves a second shot.

Michigan had their shot. They had it all right there on their plate. All they had to do was eat. They didn't get it done.

They also didn't beat enough impressive teams throughout the year to deserve an end of season higher BCS ranking than a one loss USC squad who matched Michigan's best win and then trumped it with more quality wins.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:47 pm

SoCalTrjn wrote:USC will also have to beat a BCS bound Independent

Well, yeah. Ya' think?

GreginPG · Post by **GreginPG** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:50 pm

Forget all this talk about SC for the moment. Yes, they are a 1 loss team but they've still got 2 to go.

They need to do one thing. WIN their next game!

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:53 pm

GreginPG wrote:Forget all this talk about SC for the moment. Yes, they are a 1 loss team but they've still got 2 to go.

They need to do one thing. WIN their next game!

Yep...

It almost doesn't matter where the BCS stands this week, not when USC, ND, Florida and Arkansas all still have their make-or-break games to come...

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:57 pm

GreginPG wrote:Forget all this talk about SC for the moment. Yes, they are a 1 loss team but they've still got 2 to go.

They need to do one thing. WIN their next game!

Surely, nothing gets past you.

See, this is a college football discussion forum. We come here to discuss things...college football. Part of this discussion revolves around what we think will happen and what we want to happen. Try it sometime. You might enjoy yourself.

GreginPG · Post by **GreginPG** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:06 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
GreginPG wrote:Forget all this talk about SC for the moment. Yes, they are a 1 loss team but they've still got 2 to go.

They need to do one thing. WIN their next game!
Surely, nothing gets past you.

See, this is a college football discussion forum. We come here to discuss things...college football. Part of this discussion revolves around what we think will happen and what we want to happen. Try it sometime. You might enjoy yourself.

Point taken but I just can't do it. I have a hard time discussing the what-ifs. What-ifs mean shit. What if USC had beaten Oregon State? Fuck it, What if SC had converted that 4th down in the Rose Bowl last year?

I am enjoying myself. I am enjoying the win against Kal last night and will for the rest of the day.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:34 pm

OSU-Michigan rematch would be the only true title game. Anything else would be travesty

Oh bullshit. Cry me a river. That ain't a travesty. It's a highly debatable point that didn't go Michigan's way. Nothing more, nothing less.

If Michigan wanted to remove any possibility of said "travesty" here's all they had to do:

-Beat OSU and win their conference. That's what a good Michigan team is born to do. They know it.

-Schedule better. Ball St, Vandy and Weather Vane A&M will come back to haunt you, and deservedly so, especially in a year when nearly the entirety of the Big 10 is average to horrible.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:41 pm

Since when is one "quality loss" more impressive than a host of quality wins?

Complete and utter bullshite.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:58 pm

Mace wrote:Since when is a loss to a mediocre Oregon St. team more impressive than a 3 point loss on the road to the #1 team in the land, dumbass?

Who said it was, dumbass? Obviously it isn't. The point is you compare and contrast the entire schedule of results between two teams. The fact you want to limit your entire argument to the results of one game really hurts your credibility. You rewards teams for quality wins, not "good losses." The very notion of that line of thinking is ridiculous.

And it seems like most of you are forgetting Michigan and OSU are bitter rivals. Michigan is supposed to play them tough. Why does it shock you all so much that they were able to hang? That is what tends to happen in rivalry games...you rise up, regardless of what your record is, and play harder than you have all year long. Tell me you knew?

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:20 pm

IF USC beats ND by 35 and Arkansas and Nebraska when their CCG's, then USC may be able to make that claim but thats 3 if's that wont be answered for a few weeks

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:29 pm

Mace wrote:So, dumbfuck, who's a better 1 loss team than Michigan? If you can't name a team that's better (and you can't), then STFU. Isn't the idea to get the two best teams in the championship game? If it's not, then my bad.

Yep, it is the idea. So let's get Ohio St and USC on the field (if, and only if SC can win out). Those will be your two best teams. Just because USC hasn't had the chance to lose by three or more to Michigan, doesn't mean I don't think aren't at least equally as good as Michigan. Obviously, we don't know for sure how they'd stack up against Ohio St, so let's get 'em on the field and see what happens so we can know.

What would really blow is if Michigan were to lose to OSU a second time, and we're all left wondering what USC, Florida, or Arkansas could've done.

I didn't "limit my argument to the results of one game", dumbfuck..........Michigan has 11 wins

Oh, okay then. Fair enough. So, if SC wins out do you want to look back and compare their wins to Michigan's?

For some reason, I get the feeling you'll be absent if that day comes.

And, once again.....who, besides OSU, is a better team than Michigan?

SC, if they win out. I think you could make a case for the winner of Arkansas/Florida as well, but SC is the front runner here.

Wins are our best criteria for forming judgements that relate to "who's better." And since USC will have much better ones, I'd have to say SC will be the better team.

If Michigan reaches #3 or #4, at best, I won't weep for them, as they didn't make an attempt to play a challenging OOC schedule. USC did, and if they win out, that'll be a big reason they earned the title shot.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:23 pm

I just don't buy a Pete Carroll-coached team showing up and getting "throttled" by anyone. When was the last time that even happened? What I also don't care for is that I'm just supposed to accept that as fact, just because "you say so." That's not a convincing enough argument. Let's go by what we actually know, instead of what we think we know. And what we actually know is that Michigan couldn't beat Ohio St. Let's see if somebody else can.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:23 pm

Illinois played OSU close too.

Fuck it. They're the third best team in the country. Gotta be. They played OSU the second best of any team OSU, umm, played.

Illinois is in the Sugar.

-Mace

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:25 pm

Plus Ball St played Michigan really tough, and almost won, @ Michigan even!!

Fuck it.

Ball St vs Illinois, 2007 Sugar Bowl.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:34 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I just don't buy a Pete Carroll-coached team showing up and getting "throttled" by anyone.

It wouldn't happen.

Stick a one loss USC in against OSU and USC might win the game. They won't get throttled. USC under Pete Carroll doesn't get throttled. I'd certainly give a one loss Pete Carroll led USC team a better chance of beating OSU than a Lloyd Carr led Michigan team that just lost to OSU in the ONE game they had to have, bar none.

When was the last time that even happened?

Don't know that it ever has happened. It's been at least five years since USC even lost a game by ten points, which was the last ND victory over USC, I believe. In '02 they lost two squeakers on the road due to place kicking gaffes. In '03 they lost once by 3 in triple O.T. at Cal when their kicker again killed them. No losses in '04. They lost a squeaker to Texas last year. They lost a squeaker to Oregon St this year.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:55 pm

No. Ball St.

See, apparently the only true measure that counts when ranking teams this season is to compare their losses to Ohio St. Failing that, we go with who lost best to Michigan.

Simple shit, really. Try to keep up.

What we really need is for only Michigan and Ohio St to play...everybody. Nobody else plays. Just Ohio St, really, preferably. We'll just rank the losses to OSU and then slot our bowl match ups accordingly.