Arena 2023-24 NCAA Football Discussion

I'm very interested to see what the human and computer polls show. UM was first in at least a couple of those computer polls, so this isn't a #1 beating #2 in that equation. Rutgers was also ranked second in a few of them and OSU as low as third due to SOS I believe.


Could be tricky with the BCS coming out later today...



EDIT: How does Notre Dame move down? They murder Army by something like five touchdowns and they move down a spot in the coaches poll. Arkansas wasn't that impressive and gave up 357 yards of offense to a 3-8 Mississippi State team.


Maybe I'm whining but how does that happen?

 

USC is ranked second in both the Coaches and Harris poll which account for 2/3 of the BCS equation. So it's very likely that USC will be second in the total BCS poll.



Things are getting damn interesting



EDIT: Ok, they had USC second in the Harris poll but now the poll says rankings unavailable. I guess we'll have to wait a bit.

 

Yup. Michigan's got a razor thin lead. Like eight thousandsth of a point lead.


So much rides on the ND/USC game now, even more than if USC had been at number two. Obviously USC has to win the game, and not only does Notre Dame have to win but they probably need to win big to make a jump over Michigan.


I could only find two out of the six computer polls with updated rankings. One has USC at number two, and the other stuck with Michigan.

 

Michigan is still at #2. Hm...interesting. I've always cheered for a rematch, so we'll see. Not only because no one else is deserving, but who better to play in the title game than the greatest rivalry in all of sports?

 

What if Michigan wins in a rematch? What do you do then?

 

If they won when it counts, and they're the national champions. It would upset the Buckeyes, but just like every other time. No different that last year, in the NFL, when the Colts beat Pittsburgh in regular season, but then in the playoffs Pittsburgh won and advanced. Pittsburgh won when it counted.

I just want to see it because of the rivalry, and I think they're the only team that could keep it in the same ballpark. And, seeing as my team is out of the running, I just want to watch a good game - and that's what that'll be.

 

Michigan would be the champs. It would be no different than in 1997 when Florida St. beat Florida in the regular season but then lost to Florida in the Sugar Bowl and Florida was the national champion. It isn't like this is unprecedented.

 

It would be no different than in 1997 when Florida St. beat Florida in the regular season but then lost to Florida in the Sugar Bowl and Florida was the national champion. I

should have been arizona state, but for joe germaine and OSU. i'd have taken that sun devils team over anyone, and certainly anyone since then. but anyway.

 

Doesn't make it right by any means.

 

Good point.

 

Well, the Ohio lottery numbers for yesterday were 4-2-3-9. Coincidence?

 

The BCS was created to avoid co-champions and have the two best teams playing in the final game. It has already failed once in 2003 with Auburn and USC. It's unprecedented because in 1997 there was no system that was set up to ensure #1 vs #2 at the end of the year. I just do not want to see co-champions again, and if we get an OSU/UM rematch I can certainly see Ohio State (or at least a large majority of their fans) claiming the national title along with a ringing endoresement from the AP.


Big thing to remember is that the number they have beside the teams name during the game means nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's an attempt for the media to exert some exercise of relevance that just isn't there anymore. If the media giants won't even put the BCS ranking by the team name during a game, what makes us think they'll fall in line with the BCS when there is a possible controversy?

 

I don't think that is a realistic possibility whatsoever if OSU were to lose in a rematch to Michigan. In the history of college football no team has ever been voted co-national champ after losing its bowl game.

 

My compliant is about the system. So much is made by the proponents of the BCS that the regular season is a playoff. Well, Michigan just lost their playoff game then. Yes, a comparison was made to the NFL where teams play during the regular season and then could face off again in the playoffs, but that's just it, they NFL has a for real playoff.

As some said, what happens if Michigan wins a rematch? Well, Michigan would be champs, but can't you see an argument that there needs to be a 3rd game so that it can be best 2 out of 3?

My biggest problem with Michigan getting in is that they lost their last game. Yes it was to the #1 team and it was close and all that. But to me, they lost their last game and that has to mean something. If Arkansas wins out, that's the team that should be in. They would have gotten their doors blown off in the first game but then gone on to win 12 straight. That should mean something.

I'm rambling but the BCS system sucks. It only works when there are exactly 2 undefeated teams from major conferences. Anything else leaves chaos. All one loss teams have a legitimate argument to get into the game (as well as an argument as to why they should be left out) but because we're stuck with a lousy system, only one can get in when in fact it works out perfectly if none of them get in and we were just finished now. The only way justice is served this year is if OSU wins the national championship game regardless of who they have to play. And no offense to OSU, but that's exactly why I will be rooting against them, just for the controversy. Unless they're playing USC. I don't want them to win yet another championship.

I know it will never happen, but I'd love to see a year when the Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC, Pac-10, Big East champs and Notre Dame are all undefeated. What about the controversy then? Shoot, I'd just like to see another year like 2004 with 3 undefeated teams but instead of Auburn (and some may disagree but at least in 2004 and prior, Auburn was not truly looked upon as an elite team and no one outside of the SEC really had a problem with them being left out), let's have it be a truly historically elite team that gets left out. Could you imagine the outcry if a Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, Miami, or Alabama was undefeated and were told that it wasn't good enough to get into the championship game?

 

Hey, I don't disagree with you at all that the BCS sucks. They need to scrap it and replace it with a playoff system. However, I don't think Michigan being national champion is that outrageous given the current state of the BCS system.

Here is another scenario to think about. What if OSU loses to Notre Dame in the title game. Michigan beats its opponent in the Rose Bowl (which would be either USC, Florida or Arkansas). Wouldn't Michigan have a claim for the national title as well?

 

Strength of schedule trumps late one loss team -

wish I could claim this post as my own but it's from a football forum:


As we jockey with other one loss teams for who should be #2, consider the logical consequences of some of the reasons you pundits out there (ESPN, ABC etc) give for not picking UM.
You say we should: 1. Eliminate teams that ?already had a chance?. What does that mean?

Since everyone had a chance to go undefeated, I guess should eliminate all but boise state.

2. Oh, no. Now you say we should just eliminate everyone who had a chance vs OSU? OK, that?s 12 teams. There are 107 left,. I got help from the NBA lottery to choose a team at random?and the winner is?..Florida International...the new #2

3. Eliminate teams for whom OSU can say ?I beat them already?. (This, after all, is to be "fair" to OSU, which has always been a paragon, of moral righteousness and fairness).

Unfortunately, this criterion does not consider OSU' home field or the point spread. But heck, why stop here? Let's take this logic a stop further, to select the number two team.

If a #1 team can say ?I beat them already?, why can?t a candidate #2 say the same thing?based on the idea that they must be better than any other possible candidate they beat. So let us eliminate all BCS teams that have lost to other teams in the list.

In the BCS top 25, leaves us with Boise State and USC.

USC is included here instead of someone like UM, since et is better to lose to an unranked Oregon State,than to lose to a #1 ranked OSU.

Makes sense, right?

The lower the rank is of the team you lose to, the higher your own rank must be.(Makes you want to schedule florida international next year, huh?)

4 Eliminate teams that did not win their ?conference championship?. So ND is toast on day 1. But why not eliminate everybody who does not win a conference championship game? That would eliminate the B10 and a lot of other conferences. In fact, why not go a step further then and eliminate all teams that do not play a conference championship in the SEC? So let?s kick out OSU, UM USC and everbody but Florida and Ark for the NC. Satisfied yet?

5. Eliminate teams with matchups you do not ?want? to see or teams who do not ?deserve? to play. But who decides? Does anybody in the media or the Harris or ESPN polls really have ?moral expertise?, which enables them to decide who is most deserving?

And if you want to know about who people want to see, the logical thing would be to have a fan poll.. Well, if you are looking to eliminate UM, you just made a mistake.

OSU/UM are 1-2 in the fan poll summary on fox.com. Rutgers is up there too. So maybe you should log onto the computer or ask your neighbors who they ?want to see?? After all, this is a democracy,

6. Eliminate UM because you want to see a new team play. By this logic, if you are willing to put the #1 team up against a (non-UM) team that is not really the #2 best, then why not put up a team that is not really #1 to take the place of OSU?

That could be really cool....a completely new NC game with two other teams?..it would give northwestern another chance

Personally, I would like to Northwestern play Florida International on Jan 8.

 

I think you answered your own question, in the part I bolded. You can't win the Championship unless you play for the Championship (right Auburn?).




(Unless of course you are USC and the stupid system put an undeserving Oklahoma team in the National Title Game instead of you)

 

Not so, as 2003 showed, the AP can vote who ever they want. Only the coaches are obligated to vote the BCS Championship game the #1 team. Voters can feel, as they did in 2003, that Michigan was undeservedly left out of the BCS game and deserve a share of the title. That is what happened in 2003.

 

I still say that was a very different case, because LSU didn't defeat the number one ranked team in the country to win the national title. That team was USC. If Michigan were going into their bowl with a number one ranking and won, then they would deserve that share of the title. But that's not the case.

 

The AP is free to vote whom ever they want. If Michigan wins its bowl game and OSU loses the BCS Championship, there may be many voters that feel Michigan (especially if ND wins the BCS Championship) is better than the the BCS Championship winner and votes Michigan #1.

 

I understand the fact that the AP is free to vote however they wish.

I simply do not agree that people will vote a team that lost to Ohio State over a team who beat Ohio State for the National Title, regardless of who that team is.