Sunday, December 03, 2006

Bowl Championship Screwed-up

Well, leave it to USC to ruin the BCS National Championship picture by losing to UCLA yesterday. With USC out of the picture with two losses, the question now comes to the table as to who should face Ohio State in the National Championship Game January 8th.

The choices are 11-1 Florida, the newly crowned SEC Champion, and 11-1 Michigan, whose only loss is to Ohio State. I am partial to Florida because the Gators won their conference, Michigan did not do so. Then there is the notion that Michigan and Ohio State already played at the end of the regular season and Ohio State settled that score.

Granted, it would help the Big Ten if it had a 12th team so that it could split into divisions and have a Championship Game similar to the SEC. If it did, Michigan would not likely be in any position to remain in contention for a national title after losing to the Buckeyes.

We'll all find out tonight when the BCS Bowl selections are formally announced at 8pm Eastern. For the record, the Coaches poll has Florida in the number two spot.



At Monday, December 04, 2006 7:48:00 AM, Blogger TheRep said...

How does USC stay in the top 5 with two losses to low or unranked teams? Strength of schedule is not the issue.

At Monday, December 04, 2006 2:32:00 PM, Blogger Dave Oatney said...

I blame that on the human pollsters. The raw computer polls (not the BCS rankings) DID drop USC quite a bit.

At Monday, December 04, 2006 2:43:00 PM, Blogger Matt Daley said...

Yes, the human polls are very flawed. While I can be satisfied with Florida, knowing they are just as deserving as Michigan, I can't help but think that this championship game was one manufactured by voters who did NOT vote on whether or not one team was better than the other but rather on the simple idea that they didn't want to see an OSU/UM rematch.

And Dave, I know you hate the Wolverines, but you have to feel sorry for those kids. Those guys worked their butts off for 6 months to get to this poin, and this just isn't fair. Yes, I know that life isn't fair, and they'll move on. But still, it just isn't quite right.

If Florida is better, fine...I can live with that, and Im sure those kids can to. But to manufacture a game like this? I don't like that at all.



At Tuesday, December 05, 2006 12:52:00 AM, Blogger Rob Huddleston said...

David -

Well, if the wusses that be at Notre Dame would ever feel the need to join a real conference instead of mascarading as a service academy, then the Big 10 would have its two divisions.



At Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:43:00 PM, Blogger Dave Oatney said...

You are the one who is the stout defender of the BCS. Michigan did not win their conference, and I do not believe they should play for the national championship as a result. I would say the very same thing if Ohio State had lost-so would Bo Schembechler, who before he died was adamant when he said:

"It should be like it was in the old days-let it all come down to one game between Ohio State and Michigan-no rematch."

He was pretty adamant about that when I saw that interview. I agreed then and I agree now.

As much as I would love to see Notre Dame in the Big Ten, it is not as likely to happen as it might have been 15 or 20 years ago. If Notre Dame joins a conference in football, I fear it will likely be the same conference that they affiliate with in all other sports-the Big (L)East.

He was pretty adamant about that

At Wednesday, December 06, 2006 3:04:00 PM, Blogger Matt Daley said...


You are correct that I am a supporter of the BCS -- insomuch that I recognize that no playoff is forthcoming and that the BCS is far better than previous alternatives (see: the Bowl Coalition).

The BCS doesn't "fail". It does exactly what it was designed to do -- determine the two top teams in the country based on a pre-determined and agreed-upon formula, and pit those two teams together in a bowl game with the "national championship" on the line.

The system fails in situations like this, when one wing of the formula conspires to manufacture a specific matchup, regardless of who the two best teams really are.

For the record, there is no provision in the BCS rules which prohibits a rematch in the championship game, nor is there a provision that prohibits an at-large team (i.e., one that did not win its conference) from participating in the championship game.

Had Wisconsin beaten Michigan and finished the year with the same 12-0 record as OSU, would you be so against them playing the Buckeyes, even though they're also from the Big Ten?

If Michigan had not played OSU and had finished 12-0, would you be against a matchup for the national championship then?

If you believe that a rematch shouldn't happen or that a team must win it's conference, fine...that's your opinion. But that should not hold ANY weight when determining who plays for the championship. The ONLY thing that should matter is who the two best teams are, regardless of who they have played or whether or not they've won their conference.

If the rules should be changed, then change them before punishing a group of boys who worked their tails off for a good part of the year, only to be denied a deserved opportunity based on technicalities rather than merit.

And if OSU had lost to Michigan (thereby being in the position that Michigan is in now), I'd be saying the same thing.

The title game should be OSU/Michigan, no matter who won that game back in November.



Post a Comment

<< Home

Locations of visitors to this page
Profile Visitor Map - Click to view visits
Create your own visitor map