Honestly who did michigan play other than OSU?

GeauxMT · Post by **GeauxMT** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:52 pm

Lets put the two schools that are in question (UF and UM) and swap their schedules:

UF goes 11-1 or 12-0.

UM goes maybe 10-2, 9-3. NO chance they only lose once in the SEC, its too fucking tough. Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, Georgia.

Get over yourselves Michigan fans, I hate florida and kinda like michigan but you guys are being rediculous.

Also fuck you USC, alwasy fucking things up for LSU.

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:34 am

georgia? who the fuck are you trying to kid, sec honk?

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:37 am

Check the top of the polls, you'll find 3 Big 10'ers.

BlindRef · Post by **BlindRef** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:49 am

WolverineSteve wrote:Check the top of the polls, you'll find 3 Big 10'ers.

That would involve research and an attempt at formulating an argument based somewhat in fact.

Cicero · Post by **Cicero** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:03 am

I am so tired of the fucking SEC homers coming in here and saying they are the best conference "just because." The Big 10 was just as tough. Georgia, S Car, Bama were average and LSU, AU, Ark all had at least two losses.

GeauxMT · Post by **GeauxMT** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:04 am

Are you saying that the Big 10 is better than the SEC? If so you don't watch enough SEC football.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:08 am

Florida's S.O.S. was decidely better than Michigan's. Their achievement in going 12-1 (including more wins against Top 25 teams) betters Michigan's achievement in going 11-1.

Michigan's main argument vs Florida remains...their good loss. Well, Florida's loss was nearly equally good and their quality wins more than balance out the better Michigan loss.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:09 am

SEC football is a bunch of speed guys who either play great defense or horrible offense, it's hard to say. Either way a bunch of two and three loss teams does not a great conference make.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:10 am

Van wrote:Florida's S.O.S. was decidely better than Michigan's. Their achievement in going 12-1 (including more wins against Top 25 teams) betters Michigan's achievement in going 11-1.

Michigan's main argument vs Florida remains...their good loss. Well, Florida's loss was nearly equally good and their quality wins more than balance out the better Michigan loss.

Can we throw out the game against a D-2 opponent?

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:10 am

By all means, please do...

Cicero · Post by **Cicero** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:20 am

WolverineSteve wrote:SEC football is a bunch of speed guys who either play great defense or horrible offense, it's hard to say. Either way a bunch of two and three loss teams does not a great conference make.

Exactly. The SEC gets the benefit of the doubt b/c half their schools have big names even if they do happen to suck that year.

GeauxMT · Post by **GeauxMT** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:26 am

We'll see this year wont we. LSU is going to kill Notre Dame, Arky will beat Wisconsin and Florida will beat OSU.

buckeye_in_sc · Post by **buckeye_in_sc** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:10 am

^^^^^^^^^

WOAH...no way in hell Arkansas beats Wisconsin and FLA beats tOSU...somehow the SEC feels that gimmick plays are a staple and not wrinkles thrown in every now and again...

LSU pounding ND I can see. but Sconsin and tOSU take care of business against the SEC...I mean FUCKING GEORGIA LOST TO VANDY AND FUCKING KENTUCKY...

yeah MISS State, Ole Miss, Vandy, Bama, Georgia, and South Carolina are all heads and shoulders above IU, PSU, Iowa, etc

Sky · Post by **Sky** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:36 am

Florida may have a better SOS but this four game stretch was horrible:

at #11 Auburn L 27-17
at Georgia W 21-14
at Vanderbilt W 25-19
S Carolina W 17-16

Followed by this excellent cover up:

W Carolina W 62-0

Wow, that is great.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:41 am

Sky, okay, I'm convinced. They both suck and USC sucks and I fuggen hate CF and everything else right now.

Wait. I do like the girl depicted in Ken's avatar. Andy Timmons has been kicking ass on my YouTube vids too. Pizza is still good.

Sky · Post by **Sky** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:57 am

Van wrote:Sky, okay, I'm convinced. They both suck and USC sucks and I fuggen hate CF and everything else right now.

Wait. I do like the girl depicted in Ken's avatar. Andy Timmons has been kicking ass on my YouTube vids too. Pizza is still good.

Thank you Van, if you would all just realize that everything not Ohio State sucks, period.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:24 am

Actually, besides Jessica Biel and pizza, yeah, I'm fine with that right about now.

Everything not Ohio St sucks, period.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:02 pm

Van wrote:Florida's S.O.S. was decidely better than Michigan's. Their achievement in going 12-1 (including more wins against Top 25 teams) betters Michigan's achievement in going 11-1.

Michigan's main argument vs Florida remains...their good loss. Well, Florida's loss was nearly equally good and their quality wins more than balance out the better Michigan loss.

The computers say Florida had a tougher schedule. In reality, I'm not 100% sure.

Florida had more wins vs. Top 25 teams, but not by a decided advantage (3-2). Florida beat Tennessee, Arkansas and LSU. Michigan beat Wisconsin and Notre Dame.

OOC, Florida played UCF, Southern Mississippi, Western Carolina

and Florida State, in an admittedly down year for the Noles. Michigan played Vandy, Notre Dame, Central Michigan and Ball State. Only one Top 25 team among the two teams' OOC schedules, and that's on Michigan's side.

I'm not necessarily pushing for Michigan to go to the BCS championship game. I can live with either Michigan or Florida, although it's so close between the two to underscore a need for a playoff. But I don't think Florida's supposed SOS advantage is as pronounced as many would like us to believe.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:29 pm

When the SEC teams only marquee wins are vs other SEC teams whos only marquee wins are vs other SEC teams whos only....

There lies the problem with the SEC and their arguement, until those cunts start playing 24 of their collective 48 OOC games on the road vs other BCS schools, all they are doing is a collective southern circle jerk

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:38 pm

Actually, I'm happy to see the matchups as they stand.

In UM/USC and UF/OSU, we have four solid teams. We have barometers for how three conferences that "beat each other up" will perform against each other.

Moreover, there's a point at which you let the controversy slide and you just enjoy football games. I'm reaching that point a little earlier this year...

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:41 pm

PSUFAN wrote: Moreover, there's a point at which you let the controversy slide and you just enjoy football games.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sin,
Schotzie

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:32 pm

Wisconsin played nobody. The only difficult game they had was against Michigan and they lost. Did I hear Barry Alvarez correctly last night on the BCS selection show that the Top 7 BCS teams should get automatic bids? Hmmm, and Wisconsin was #7. Shocking!!

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:46 pm

I could've lived with Florida finishing second in the polls ahead of Michigan especially if they had dropped them below #2 after the Ohio State loss. Lloyd said it best when he brought up the fact Florida probably wouldn't have jumped Michigan in the polls had USC won. Michigan was thought to be #2 team in the country even in spite of the loss to the Buckeyes but the pollsters clearly want to see Florida in that game instead. It does undermind the system of pitting #1 vs. #2 in Glendale. If Florida was truly #2...they should've been ahead of Michigan before last week when they beat Florida State. Michigan doesn't have a claim for moving up beyond #2 since they lost to #1 and they didn't have any more games to play. If the pollsters want Michigan out of the Glendale game after the Ohio State game...they should've dropped them to #4 behind USC and Florida but instead they seem to have dropped them to #3 and kept them there out of convenience. Whether or not Michigan deserves to play the Buckeyes again really isn't an issue with me...I just have a problem with the way people have been voting in polls.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:07 pm

Fuck...how do you explain this to people this dense?

OK...DO try and follow, OK?

Did it maybe occur to you that Florida had a huge, huge, huge game coming up ahead after the polls of two weeks ago? Maybe your pea-brain can grasp ahold of the concept that the pollsters were giving Michigan the benefit of the doubt, and were reserving FINAL judgement until after Florida had completed their entire body of work?

Why is this "body of work" concept so fucking hard for some?

OK, let's get all "hypothetical" up in this bitch...

What if there was greater disparity in completion of schedules?

For the sake of discussion, let's say University A ran the table. University B got through their schedule with one loss, but finished their entire schedule by October 1st(you DO understand what "hypothetical" means, right?). Now, let's say University C finishes their theorhetically tougher schedule with more impressive victories November 31st. Would it be on the pollsters that they reserved final judgement until all the games were played?

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:10 pm

Dinsdale wrote:For the sake of discussion, let's say University A ran the table. University B got through their schedule with one loss, but finished their entire schedule by October 1st(you DO understand what "hypothetical" means, right?). Now, let's say University C finishes their theorhetically tougher schedule with more impressive victories November 31st. Would it be on the pollsters that they reserved final judgement until all the games were played?

What are these "universities" that you speak of?

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:14 pm

That was intended to cement the "hypothetical" aspect.

I'm not familiar with any universities named A, B, or C, either.

But by all means, don't let that stop you...

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:20 pm

The thought crossed my mind that the U&L was just so fucking awesome in November, they added another day just for the increased enjoyment.

FLW Buckeye · Post by **FLW Buckeye** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:31 pm

PSUFAN wrote:Actually, I'm happy to see the matchups as they stand.

In UM/USC and UF/OSU, we have four solid teams. We have barometers for how three conferences that "beat each other up" will perform against each other.

Moreover, there's a point at which you let the controversy slide and you just enjoy football games. I'm reaching that point a little earlier this year...

An excellent take...Rack.