Random thoughts

Killian · Post by **Killian** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:24 pm

When the final gun sounded on the UofM/OSU game on Saturday, so went Notre Dame's slim chances at the BCS game on January 8th. Oh well. ND lost all right to bitch when they got hammerd by UofM in September.

I understand this, and I agree with it. To me, head to head is all that matters when using arbitrary tie breakers to seperate teams. Team A beat Team B, they have the same records, Team A gets the benefit of the doubt. This is why I had no problem with Miami winning the NC in 1989, but a huge problem with FSU winning it in 1993.

It's going to get tired hearing about all of the "rematch" bullshit for the next few weeks until the bowl pairings are announced. It will get even worse if UofM and OSU are selected to square up again.

Any Notre Dame fan who tries to argue that ND deserves a shot doesn't know how silly they come across to ND fans and non-ND fans alike.

What I don't understand, is how Arkansas jumps ND in the Harris, Coaches and AP poll? Arkansas beat a Ole Miss by 14, ND beat Army by 32. Both opponets were awful, so why does Arkansas gain a spot in all of these polls? Interesting.

As to who deserves to play OSU in Glendale, I think you have to ask yourself who has looked like the second best team in the nation this year.

USC? Lost to Oregon State on the road, and needed a huge comeback to get it to the 2pt conversion try.

Florida? Lost to an overrated Auburn team on the road by 10.

Notre Dame? Got their ass kicked by Michigan by 26.

Michigan? Lost to the #1 team in the nation on the road by 3.

Arkansas? Hammerfucked by USC by 36.

In my opinion, as much as I don't want to see a rematch, no matter what happens to the other one loss teams, Michigan has earned a right to play for the national championship. They shouldn't be denied a shot at the title because of who their opponet will be in that game.

If UF and FSU got a rematch in '96, then UofM deserves one this year no matter the outcome of the SEC championship game, and the USC/ND and USC/UCLA games.

Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to think about their opinion long and hard and try to come up with a good argument as to why UofM doesn't deserve a shot to play for the NC. Take "rematch" out of the equation and argue why they aren't the second best team in the country.

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:36 pm

Very insightful post to say the least. I think if USC were to win out, then they could make a case for being right up there with Michigan.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:42 pm

ND's position in the BCS is still to be decided by some important factors. The USC game is one, USC's game against UCLA is another.

Myself, I think UM is the second best team in the land. IF there were to be a rematch at a neutral site, I think it would be a hell of a ballgame.

I don't personally see any teams defeating either UM or OSU. If we want the MNC to be well-contested, then I don't see how we should categorically rule out a rematch.

BTW, I hate the fact that the Big 10 season is over on November 18th. The rest of 1-A has a lot of important football left.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:51 pm

Easy.

None of the potential one loss teams except Michigan had the oppportunity to play Ohio St so Michigan hanging their hat on a late season loss in the one game they had to have, the game that knocked them out of even winning their own conference, is not to be rewarded.

We reward teams for wins, not losses; especially not a loss in a rivalry which ALWAYS produces close games anyway, regardless of the records of each team.

Michigan only has two notable wins: ND and Wisconsin.

Arkansas may well end the season with wins over Auburn, Tennessee, LSU and Florida.

Florida may well end the season with wins over Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas and Georgia, their rivalry game.

USC may well end up with wins over a one loss SEC champ, Arkansas, Big XII champ Nebraska (:chuckle:), Cal, Oregon and TWO rivalry games, back to back, #6 ND and UCLA.

Comparing the S.O.S. of all the one loss teams, there's simply no comparison. Michigan isn't close. Ball St, Vandy and Central Michigan will do that to you, especially in a year where every other Big 10 opponent of Michigan's save Wisconsin was in the midst of a down year.

Also, again, Michigan had their best team in awhile and still they didn't even win their rivalry game or their conference and they have scant little else to point to in terms of Quality Wins. They didn't earn their way into the title game merely by losing well to OSU, lest Illinois should also be BCS bowl bound.

It's who you beat, not who you lost to. Wins and the quality of those wins are what matter, otherwise Boise St would already be in and the Big East winner would still be a viable candidate for the title game. Michigan's calling card can't be a loss in their own rivalry game in which their supposedly immovable defense gave up nine thousand yards and 42 points and let's face it, by season's end that's really all they'll have on which to hang their hats vs the other one loss teams...

The only way Michigan gets in is if it comes down to Michigan vs ND. Otherwise, nope, there's no way their weak S.O.S. and relative lack of Quality Wins gets 'em in over a one loss USC or a one loss SEC winner.

Cicero · Post by **Cicero** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:52 pm

Totally agree and this was written by a fan of a one loss team that will be left out. RACK.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:55 pm

The title of the thread was sure to draw out some Sissyroo claptrap.

The Seer · Post by **The Seer** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:56 pm

PSUFAN wrote:
BTW, I hate the fact that the Big 10 season is over on November 18th. The rest of 1-A has a lot of important football left.

Yeah, what the fuck is up with that? Did you guys start in July or something?????

Cicero · Post by **Cicero** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:58 pm

PSUFAN wrote:The title of the thread was sure to draw out some Sissyroo claptrap.

Im sorry. I forgot you are the only one allowed to have an opinion.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:01 pm

You can't have an opinion...but that has nothing to do with me.

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:24 pm

Have to RACK Van for that take.

FLW Buckeye · Post by **FLW Buckeye** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:35 pm

The Seer wrote:
PSUFAN wrote:
BTW, I hate the fact that the Big 10 season is over on November 18th. The rest of 1-A has a lot of important football left.

Yeah, what the fuck is up with that? Did you guys start in July or something?????

It's the number of bye weeks. tOSU - none, UCLA - 2, this week and week 3.

FLW Buckeye · Post by **FLW Buckeye** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:44 pm

Van wrote:Easy.

None of the potential one loss teams except Michigan had the oppportunity to play Ohio St so Michigan hanging their hat on a late season loss in the one game they had to have, the game that knocked them out of even winning their own conference, is not to be rewarded.

We reward teams for wins, not losses; especially not a loss in a rivalry which ALWAYS produces close games anyway, regardless of the records of each team.

Michigan only has two notable wins: ND and Wisconsin.

Arkansas may well end the season with wins over Auburn, Tennessee, LSU and Florida.

Florida may well end the season with wins over Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas and Georgia, their rivalry game.

USC may well end up with wins over a one loss SEC champ, Arkansas, Big XII champ Nebraska (:chuckle:), Cal, Oregon and TWO rivalry games, back to back, #6 ND and UCLA.

Comparing the S.O.S. of all the one loss teams, there's simply no comparison. Michigan isn't close. Ball St, Vandy and Central Michigan will do that to you, especially in a year where every other Big 10 opponent of Michigan's save Wisconsin was in the midst of a down year.

Also, again, Michigan had their best team in awhile and still they didn't even win their rivalry game or their conference and they have scant little else to point to in terms of Quality Wins. They didn't earn their way into the title game merely by losing well to OSU, lest Illinois should also be BCS bowl bound.

It's who you beat, not who you lost to. Wins and the quality of those wins are what matter, otherwise Boise St would already be in and the Big East winner would still be a viable candidate for the title game. Michigan's calling card can't be a loss in their own rivalry game in which their supposedly immovable defense gave up nine thousand yards and 42 points and let's face it, by season's end that's really all they'll have on which to hang their hats vs the other one loss teams...

The only way Michigan gets in is if it comes down to Michigan vs ND. Otherwise, nope, there's no way their weak S.O.S. and relative lack of Quality Wins gets 'em in over a one loss USC or a one loss SEC winner.

Let's see... (reading, reading) Holy shit, Van! Giving props to not just one, but TWO SEC schools for their S.O.S. and no mention of a weak OOC schedule?

You, sir, are slipping.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:56 pm

Nah, FLW, see, I would do as you say...if the debate were between USC and the SEC winner.

It's not. USC's in if they win out, period, precisely because of their S.O.S. and their willingness to schedule Arkansas on the road, Nebraska and ND OOC rather than Ball St, Vandy and Central Michigan. No, this debate is between Michigan and the SEC winner and Michigan is every bit as guilty this season as the SEC winner of scheduling OOC creampuffs. Difference is, a one loss SEC winner will have beaten better in conference teams since with the exception of Ohio St, Michigan and Wisconsin the Big 10 was very down this year.

Also, a one loss SEC winner will've at least won its rivalry game(s). That's one big thing I can't get past with Michigan. Their mission in life is to beat Ohio St. If they ever want to win a national championship they know from the womb to pushing up daisies that the road to a national title MUST go through Ohio St.

They don't get to take a detour around Ohio St on their way to The Promised Land. Slaying Wisconsin and ND and nobody else won't cut it. Michigan and Ohio St must first beat the other before they can think of going forward and in the case of the weak Big 10 offering up scant little else in terms of Quality Wins this was especially true this season.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:21 pm

PSUFAN wrote:ND's position in the BCS is still to be decided by some important factors. The USC game is one, USC's game against UCLA is another.

I disagree. I think ND is in an extremely unique (especially for us) situation in that the USC game ultimately will be completely irrelevant to our bowl destination.

Beat USC, and we go to the Sugar Bowl against either Florida or Arkansas. Lose to USC, and we still go to the Sugar Bowl against either Florida or Arkansas.

The only difference is the mechanism by which we go. If we beat USC, we're a Top 8 team and become an automatic qualifier for the BCS. Lose to USC, and we're probably not a Top 8 team (although there is a slim chance we could remain ranked that high, if the game is close), but we're still a Top 14 team and therefore eligible for an at-large selection for the BCS. And we'll be the most attractive team to the Sugar Bowl when it comes time for them to select.

The Rose Bowl won't select us, since that would entail a rematch vs. either Michigan or USC. The Rose is the only bowl with a chance of selecting ahead of the Sugar at this point.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:47 pm

In most any other year, Michigan's routine OOC creampuffs probably wouldn't have worked against them as much as it might this year.

But the fact that teams 4 through 11 in the Big Ten were as weak as they've been in a long while, means Michigan can't point to their OOC schedule of wins to offset such a bleak conference slate of wins. You've got Notre Dame, a traditional rival, and 3 creampuffs (although UofM does benefit a little bit from beating a much improved CMU team).

I think if USC beats ND and UCLA, they'll leap Michigan, and it'll be mostly due to SC's willingness to schedule, and win tough OOC games. Michigan doesn't take risks outside of the Big Ten, and it could come back to bite them.

And, the Oregon St loss, well...certainly nothing good came from it, but I get the feeling the computers won't view a loss to a potential 9-win team quite as damaging as the rest of you...whether that's fair or not.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:12 pm

Terry, one question...

Let's say you're the Sugar Bowl selection committee...

Now, I realize ND is Leave It To Beaver and all that but I'm wondering...

Let's say USC stomps ND. ND would then have two bad losses in their only two marquee match ups this season. Meanwhile, there's one loss Louisville or WVU, a BCS Conference champ, one of whom actually came down and won your bowl game last season.

Are you sure both the Rose and the Sugar would tab a two loss ND team (including a late season bad loss) over a one loss Big East champ?

Also, what about LSU and Texas? If LSU goes up to Fayetteville and beats Arkansas then I'd have to say they're a better two loss team than ND and the Rose might take them over ND, espeically if ND ends up ranked something like 12th and LSU ends up somewhere around 7th. Texas, as the defending national champ, two time defending Rose Bowl champ and reigning Big XII champ? They're a definite possible for the Rose, aren't they??

I'm just not getting why you say that win or lose against USC ND will still be a lock for either the Rose or especially the Sugar. Seems to be that the only way they'd get into either bowl with two bad losses would be due to their name, and nothing else. They'd certainly be ranked well below their competition for those other bowls and progams with the name recognition, national stature, traveling ability and recent bowl successes of Texas and LSU would both seem to me to be no brainers over a failed ND team who hasn't won a bowl game or even won a big regular season game since Clinton was in his first term...

I gotta say, man, if I'm the Sugar Bowl and I'm looking for the best game with the most excitement matching the most highly ranked and most deserving teams I'm pitting the SEC winner against either Texas or LSU, not a two loss ND team. Tabbing either Texas or LSU would make for an absolute riot of fanaticism in SEC Country.

Texas, vs Florida or, even better, Arkansas?

LSU playing in the Superdome, against Florida? That'd be nearly biblical to those folks down there. (No way in hell though they'd tab LSU if LSU beats Arkansas this week and then Arknsas goes ahead and beats Florida in the SEC CCG...)

I just don't see ND being all that attractive of a choice for the SEC match up, not if USC rolls 'em and they're coming in all haggard and broke dick...

War Stoops · Post by **War Stoops** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:14 pm

To add my own homer random thought...

It's highly likely that the Rose Bowl will select Oklahoma to play Michigan IF the Sooners are able to beat Oklahoma State. Given recent history and the announcement today that Peterson won't play versus the Pokes, that's a very big IF.

I think its 50/50 for OU this weekend but a possible matchup versus Michigan makes me even more excited about Bedlam. Peterson will be back for the bowl game and while Michigan would deservedly be a large favorite it would be a fun match-up.

War Stoops · Post by **War Stoops** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:25 pm

Van, I know you weren't asking me, but to answer your questions, the Big 12 Champ automatically goes to the Fiesta and the Big East Champ automatically goes to the Orange. That's why the Sugar will be selecting an at-large team and Notre Dame probably would be the first choice. They might take LSU ahead of Notre Dame, but I doubt it.

Assuming the favorites win out, here's what I think the BCS Bowls will look like.

NC Game: OSU vs. USC
Rose: Michigan vs. Oklahoma or SEC at-large
Sugar: Florida vs. Notre Dame
Orange: Georgia Tech vs. Louisville
Fiesta: Texas vs. Boise State

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:41 pm

WS, if the Big East champ automatically goes to the Orange then why did Big East champ WVU play SEC champ Georgia in the Sugar last year?

Isn't it the ACC champ who automatically goes to the Orange, where their champ (Florida St) played at large Penn St?

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:43 pm

Regarding strength of schedule, not sure that Michigan is that far behind USC. Sagarin shows the following:

USC 3
Michigan 12
Notre Dame 30
Florida 36
Arkansas 73

Of course, Sagarin thinks Cal is still #6.

War Stoops · Post by **War Stoops** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:49 pm

Van, I think you're right about the Big East. My bad. Was there a Big East tie-in with the OB before Miami, VT, and BC bailed?

Regardless, Texas is definitely headed to the Fiesta and I can't see the Suguar taking Louisville over Notre Dame unless SC beats the Domers 50-0 or something like that.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:54 pm

Here’s the CBS wonk’s bowl predictions (including tOSU vs Mich for the championship):

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootba ... redictions

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:56 pm

First, I'll digress with one of my pet peeves --

Terry in Crapchester wrote:I think ND is in an extremely unique (especially for us) situation.

No, no they're not. There aren't varying degrees of uniqueness. "Uni" out front should have told you. There's either one of something, or there are more than one(or possibly zero). "Unique" is an absolute, and can't be qualified.

I Pick on Terry because he generally is such a good writer.

But anyhoo, not that it matters a whole lot, but unfortunately, I'm exposed to the Beaver Believers on a daily basis(they should call them the "Beaver Bandwagoners). And OrSU(I kinda like that...Oklahoma State and Oregon state should have to differentiate themselves from Ohio State, not the other way around) started off the season quite horribly. I mean, they were BAD. Students and boosters wanted Riley's head on a platter, and QB Matt Moore even took semi-violent attacks from the student section during games(certainly not shocking behavior from Beav fans, by any means). When the program was in a complete and utter state of meltage, all of a sudden they capped the Huskies when Washington was looking to crack the rankings and getting some acclaim. But the Beavs came up with a great gameplan, and did up Isiah Stanback, not just for the game, but for the whole season(in typical Beaver fashion...if you can't beat them fair and square, take out their best player). All of a sudden, the Beavs were ROLLING. For those few weeks, they could hang with, and even beat any team in the country, which they proved. But, let's not get carried away -- they're the Beavs, and have returned to form since then. But that was a very odd run from that team -- they looked like they could have given OSU(the real one) a run for their money at times with that bunch of rejects-from-the-decent-schools* they were rolling out there.

So I guess what I'm saying, is that while records and stats don't really show it, USC ran into an absolute buzzsaw for their loss. I haven't been nearly as impressed with USC as I have in recent years(sin, Marcus Allen), but BODE is BODE, and they rolled through a good conference and a tough OOC(not quite yet, granted, I'm speculating)nearly unscathed, with their only defeat coming at the hands of a team that was playing very well at the time.

* - Except Sabby Piscitelli, who's an absolute beast...I noticed USC didn't want any part of that guy, but Petey has always been pretty wise when it comes to avoiding opposing defensive players.

Just trying to shed a little light on the OrSu loss.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:59 pm

War Stoops wrote:Van, I think you're right about the Big East. My bad. Was there a Big East tie-in with the OB before Miami, VT, and BC bailed?

I'm asking because I don't really know, but didn't adding the BCS Championship as a seperate entity alter the tie-ins to a degree?

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:01 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:Regarding strength of schedule, not sure that Michigan is that far behind USC. Sagarin shows the following:

USC 3
Michigan 12
Notre Dame 30
Florida 36
Arkansas 73

Of course, Sagarin thinks Cal is still #6.

Michigan's done with their schedule, as are Michigan's key opponents. Their S.O.S. will remain as it is.

USC still has ND and UCLA to go and USC's previous opponents also have other games to go. By season's end a one loss USC will absolutely see a substantial increase in their S.O.S. advantage over Michigan.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:05 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:Here’s the CBS wonk’s bowl predictions (including tOSU vs Mich for the championship):

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootba ... redictions

Gah!!!!

USC vs...WVU???

Texas vs...Boise St!!

BOOOOOOO!!!!!

I'm not worried though. If USC handles their business in their final two games there's no way they won't overcome the current very slight gap between them and Michigan for the BCS #2 slot.

If USC doesn't handle their business then fine, the Rose Bowl it is and bring on whoever...

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:14 pm

How would you like to be Nevada? They could knock Boise out of the BCS, or they could worry more about increased revenue through BCS money if they don't win.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:19 pm

MuchoBulls wrote:They could knock Boise out of the BCS, or they could worry more about increased revenue through BCS money if they don't win.

And if'n I'm not mistaken, they've got a new stadium to pay for.

Hmmm...go after it which would do wonders for recruiting for an up-and-comer, or get your cut of the big bucks...hmmm....

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:19 pm

Van wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Regarding strength of schedule, not sure that Michigan is that far behind USC. Sagarin shows the following:

USC 3
Michigan 12
Notre Dame 30
Florida 36
Arkansas 73

Of course, Sagarin thinks Cal is still #6.
Michigan's done with their schedule, as are Michigan's key opponents. Their S.O.S. will remain as it is.

USC still has ND and UCLA to go and USC's previous opponents also have other games to go. By season's end a one loss USC will absolutely see a substantial increase in their S.O.S. advantage over Michigan.

Oh, their strength of schedule is going to be 1 or 2, instead of 3? Plus, there’s always the possibility that if USC won a close game against Notre Damn and really struggled with UCLA, they might lose ground with some of the pollsters.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:32 pm

Yep, and there's also the distinct possibility that they might lose one or even both of 'em outright.

I'm just going on the supposition that USC handles their business otherwise this whole discussion is moot insofar as USC is concerned.

War Stoops · Post by **War Stoops** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:40 pm

OK, I looked it up. Here are the current BCS Conference tie-ins:

Rose - Big 10 vs. Pac 10
Fiesta - Big 12
Sugar - SEC
Orange - ACC

This year, the order of selection for remaining BCS qualifiers is as follows:

Sugar, Orange, Fiesta.

However, should a BCS bowl lose one of its participants to the Championship Game, that bowl selects first. In the Rose Bowl's case, should it lose both its teams, it will pick first and second.

So, again, let's assume that all the favorites win out. It will be OSU vs. USC in the MNC game. The Rose Bowl will then pick first and second from the remaining qualifiers. However, it will not be able to pick Texas, Florida, or Georgia Tech because of the automatic tie-ins. Obviously, the Rose Bowl's first choice will be Michigan. But whom would the Rose Bowl select next?

The available pool will likely include:

Arkansas (10-2)
Notre Dame (10-2)
West Virginia (11-1)
Boise State (12-0)
Oklahoma (10-2*Oregon)
Auburn (10-2)

All bias aside, I think Oklahoma makes the most intriguing match-up for the Rose. If OU beats Okie State, it will be coming off a 7-game win streak with 4 of the 7 wins on the road, Peterson will be healthy, and everyone is aware of the Oregon debacle. The wild card is LSU. If they beat Arkansas, a LSU-Michigan Rose Bowl would also be very attractive. Notre Dame could be selected but I don't think the Rose will want a rematch.

FLW Buckeye · Post by **FLW Buckeye** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:53 pm

^^^

If Arkansas pulls out the CCG win, a UF/scUM matchup looks real good.

JMHO

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:58 pm

Great post, WS...

Looking at your pool of potential two loss teams to face Michigan there I'd say it'd come down to ND, LSU and OU.

Gotta say though, OU probably brings up the rear there in terms of attractiveness to the Rose Bowl.

Even with two losses the idea of bringing traditional Pac 10 rival ND out west to play in its first Rose Bowl in eons would certainly make for a more glamorous match up than Michigan-OU or Michigan-LSU.

Not saying it's the best match up or the most deserving match up but coming from Pac 10 country I can tell you that ND playing Michigan in a Rose Bowl is a far more compelling notion on the west coast than OU playing Michigan in a Rose Bowl...

ND, as the Rose Bowl "stand in" for the Pac 10 against the Big 10 representative? In Pac 10 Land, man, how weird would that be??

If it were up to me though, well, just for shits and giggles I'd bring in Boise St!! Michigan-Boise St! Bwaaahaaaa!! Second choice for me would be the Big East winner, hoping against hope that Michigan could even be bothered to open up a hellacious can of whoopass on the Big East pretender....

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:00 pm

I like the OU idea, as well....even this Duck fan doesn't think they got the fairest of shakes. OU Mich has some appealing qualities about it.

But so does Arkansas. Both teams are obviously going to slam it up the gut a lot, and while Michigan's open-field tackling was exposed, they sure stop the run at the LOS.

I'm kinda OG PAC, so if neither USC or OSU is there, the Big10/PAC10 thing is fairly sacred, but being BCS, I don;t think a matchup with Cal would cut the muster.

But the idea of a SEC team coming Out West for an asskicking is pretty intriguing, too. Make the fags get on a plane for once.(OK, maybe not quite "once," but you know what I mean.)

The spiteful guy in me wants the SEC, the AD fan in me wants OU. The traditionalist in me insists on Michigan, though, to at least keep half of the Rose Bowl tradition alive. I think Michigan has played in a Rose Bowl or two, and since the Big10/Pac10 rivalry game is THE traditional bowl rivalry, let's keep it somewhat intact.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:15 pm

Lets let this USC team and its fans focus on one thing, beating the Irish, the rest of that stuff will work itsself out. The only thing that is important right now is beating Notre Dame

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

Hopefully, the Trojans will be looking ahead to UCLA.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 pm

SoCalTrjn, well, yeah; obviously.

We as USC fans though here on a Monday afternoon at our 'puters have no ability to affect USC's on the field performance against ND this upcoming Saturday.

The coaches and players have their job to do and we as fans have our job to do. Their job is to not look ahead and to focus solely on the task at hand: beating their next opponent. Our job however is to speculate, agitate, pontificate and, in the case of bradhusker, conjugate to our heart's content while also basking in the insults hurled our way from Dins, PSU and Mgo.

This board would become a ghost town if all we as fans ever did was say, "Lets' wait until all the games are in the books, then we'll talk."

No. We'll talk NOW!! If we wait until the games have been played then what in the fuck good is it to be m2??

War Stoops · Post by **War Stoops** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 11:01 pm

FLW Buckeye wrote:If Arkansas pulls out the CCG win, a UF/scUM matchup looks real good.

JMHO

Agreed. My entire post was predicated on all favorites winning the next two weeks. I'm assuming that Arkansas will be a slight dog to Florida.

Van wrote:Gotta say though, OU probably brings up the rear there in terms of attractiveness to the Rose Bowl.

Even with two losses the idea of bringing traditional Pac 10 rival ND out west to play in its first Rose Bowl in eons would certainly make for a more glamorous match up than Michigan-OU or Michigan-LSU.

Not saying it's the best match up or the most deserving match up but coming from Pac 10 country I can tell you that ND playing Michigan in a Rose Bowl is a far more compelling notion on the west coast than OU playing Michigan in a Rose Bowl...

Also agreed. In a vacuum, the Rose Bowl would clearly select Notre Dame to play Michigan. But would they pick a Notre Dame team that still has Michigan cleat marks on its back from the previous meeting? Maybe. If so, then the Sugar would probably take Louisville vs. Florida and the Orange would be left to choose from the aforementioned group. My guess would be Oklahoma, West Virginia, or LSU versus Georgia Tech.

Dinsdale wrote:I'm kinda OG PAC, so if neither USC or OSU is there, the Big10/PAC10 thing is fairly sacred, but being BCS, I don;t think a matchup with Cal would cut the muster.

I know you aren't calling for a Cal / Michigan Rose Bowl but I just wanted to point out that isn't an option because Cal won't be in the BCS top 14.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:47 am

If Nebraska wins the Big 12 title game, is OU knocked out of BCS boiwl contention? I cant imagine the big 12 getting to send 3 teams to BCS bowls. That would make OU fans have to cheer for [gasp] Texas

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:50 am

I just think it would be really neat if Michigan played Ohio St. again and lost for the 4th consecutive time. That would be really super, and would solve a lot, as well as highlight what a wonderful system we have.