Michigan remains #2 in BCS

[RaistlinZ]

The whole point of the BCS is to put the best two teams in the country against each other for the championship, which is where we are now with OSU #1 and Michigan #2. I don't know why anyone would argue that USC deserves to be #2 when they clearly aren't the 2nd best team in the country, and they lost to an unranked team.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: wyvrn

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This is officially why I hate the polls. While I think Michigan could be the #2 team in the country, I think other teams deserve a shot. They should fall at least a couple of spots after they lose to give teams like USC and FLA a chance.

USC has a chance, they have to beat ND and UCLA. If they beat them they are in.

Florida is likely in if USC loses and they throttle Arkansas in the SEC Championship game, but that isnt likely.

But Michigan shouldn't be #2 after a loss. USC should be.

Who says they shouldnt be #2, the lost by 3 to the #1 team.

If USC doesnt throttle ND, they shouldnt be #2.

why not
usc would have beaten sec west champion, big 12 north champion, a good cal team and notre dam

michigan would have lost close to #1 team and beaten Wisconsin and notre dame

i agree Michigan is a really good team but pollsters give too much importance to a close loss to a good team

If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

Nebraska and the Big 12 north(big 12 in general) are a joke.

They havent played ND yet. IF they beat ND(and UCLA), they will be #2.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ
The whole point of the BCS is to put the best two teams in the country against each other for the championship, which is where we are now with OSU #1 and Michigan #2. I don't know why anyone would argue that USC deserves to be #2 when they clearly aren't the 2nd best team in the country, and they lost to an unranked team.

usc also played a very touch schedule and won those games, you cant base ranking based on 1 close loss

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: wyvrn

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This is officially why I hate the polls. While I think Michigan could be the #2 team in the country, I think other teams deserve a shot. They should fall at least a couple of spots after they lose to give teams like USC and FLA a chance.

USC has a chance, they have to beat ND and UCLA. If they beat them they are in.

Florida is likely in if USC loses and they throttle Arkansas in the SEC Championship game, but that isnt likely.

But Michigan shouldn't be #2 after a loss. USC should be.

Who says they shouldnt be #2, the lost by 3 to the #1 team.

If USC doesnt throttle ND, they shouldnt be #2.

why not
usc would have beaten sec west champion, big 12 north champion, a good cal team and notre dam

michigan would have lost close to #1 team and beaten Wisconsin and notre dame

i agree Michigan is a really good team but pollsters give too much importance to a close loss to a good team

If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

Nebraska and the Big 12 north(big 12 in general) are a joke.

They havent played ND yet. IF they beat ND(and UCLA), they will be #2.

I can give you the same if USC played oregon state today they would own them , that would mean they are undefeated and this conversation is a moot point

 

[kstu]

Originally posted by: wyvrn

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This is officially why I hate the polls. While I think Michigan could be the #2 team in the country, I think other teams deserve a shot. They should fall at least a couple of spots after they lose to give teams like USC and FLA a chance.

USC had a chance to not lose to unranked Oregon State, but they blew that chance. Michigan lost to the top team in the country, and it was a darn close game.

If anything that reaffirms that they could very well be the second best in the country.

USC fell a number of spots after the loss. Michigan should also. It's ridiculous, but see my post above in that I think the BCS is a total fraud anyway.

great argument here. you mean usc dropped spots after losing to oregon state? you dont say. michigan lost to the number 1 team in the country. comparing usc's loss to michigan's is ridiculous.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Wreckem
If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

That point is moot. Its like me saying "If USC had played Oregon St. today they would so get f'n owned."

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
The real problem is what if we do get a rematch and Michigan wins? What a clusterf#ck that would be. Gotta love the BCS.

Okay, so with your logic, if NBA team #1 swept NBA team #2 4-0 in a season series, but NBA team #2 beats NBA team #1 in a conference finals series, it's a clusterf#ck?

 

[wyvrn]

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ
The whole point of the BCS is to put the best two teams in the country against each other for the championship, which is where we are now with OSU #1 and Michigan #2. I don't know why anyone would argue that USC deserves to be #2 when they clearly aren't the 2nd best team in the country, and they lost to an unranked team.

I'll tell you why this is stupid. In every other sport (with a playoff system), teams lose to teams ranked lower than them or have a worse record, but go on to win the championship. Any good team can have a tough day but still be a great team. The whole BCS is subjective, including the computer polls, because teams don't all play the same level of competition, so the SOS ratings are also bogus.

 

[wyvrn]

Originally posted by: kstu

Originally posted by: wyvrn

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This is officially why I hate the polls. While I think Michigan could be the #2 team in the country, I think other teams deserve a shot. They should fall at least a couple of spots after they lose to give teams like USC and FLA a chance.

USC had a chance to not lose to unranked Oregon State, but they blew that chance. Michigan lost to the top team in the country, and it was a darn close game.

If anything that reaffirms that they could very well be the second best in the country.

USC fell a number of spots after the loss. Michigan should also. It's ridiculous, but see my post above in that I think the BCS is a total fraud anyway.

great argument here. you mean usc dropped spots after losing to oregon state? you dont say. michigan lost to the number 1 team in the country. comparing usc's loss to michigan's is ridiculous.

This argument is very lame and I wish people would stop using it. USC has a very tough schedule, and to date, they have lost once. What difference does it make to whom? Their schedule dwarfs both Michigan's and OSU's so it is more likely they would lose. But they are still a good team and deserve a spot at the NC. I am not even a USC fan, I like ND and Texas A&M. But I think USC is getting majorly jobbed here.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

Sweet.

Next year, the BCS title should be decided by zero games and your one-man poll.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: wyvrn

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
The real problem is what if we do get a rematch and Michigan wins? What a clusterf#ck that would be. Gotta love the BCS.

It wouldnt be a cluster ****** because Michigan would take both the AP and BCS title.

OSU wouldnt hold on to the #1 ranking in the AP with a loss to the #2 team.

And the winner of the BCS Title game is the winner of the BCS title.

How would it be a clusterfuck?

This is bullsh!t. I agree they played well against OSU, but they lost. The rest of their schedule hasn't been that impressive, so what is the overwhelming evidence that they whould remain #2?

Because USC hasnt played ND yet. The rankings dont take into account potential wins. USC lost to an UNRANKED team, they beat a crappy Nebraska team. Nebraska will finish the season unranked after a loss to Texas in the Big 12 title game.

As its been pointed out, Michigan has the best loss by a one-loss team and the best win by a one loss team. If USC wins out, its simple, they are in. How I think ND will upset them next week. Every team in control of its destiny has botched it the following week.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ
The whole point of the BCS is to put the best two teams in the country against each other for the championship, which is where we are now with OSU #1 and Michigan #2. I don't know why anyone would argue that USC deserves to be #2 when they clearly aren't the 2nd best team in the country, and they lost to an unranked team.

usc also played a very touch schedule and won those games, you cant base ranking based on 1 close loss

If it was a close loss to a top 10 yeah, but a team ranked in the high 30's? Uh gimme a break. A loss to a unranked team is and should be highly detremental.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

If USC wins out, its simple, they are in.

So what's the argument then?

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
The real problem is what if we do get a rematch and Michigan wins? What a clusterf#ck that would be. Gotta love the BCS.

It wouldnt be a cluster ****** because Michigan would take both the AP and BCS title.

OSU wouldnt hold on to the #1 ranking in the AP with a loss to the #2 team.

And the winner of the BCS Title game is the winner of the BCS title.

How would it be a clusterfuck?

Wow, you got so wraped up in numbers and rankings that common sense just completely eluded you. Yes, I'm aware Michigan would be the across the board champion if they happened to split with OSU in their second crack at them.

However, I really don't feel like explaining common sense to you. If you can't see why that would be a little silly then I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince you.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Wreckem
If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

That point is moot. Its like me saying "If USC had played Oregon St. today they would so get f'n owned."

Well if, USC gets the benifit of beating Arkansas, which was clearly not the same team they are now, at the begining of the season, they should take the negative effects of losing to an unranked team.

 

[wyvrn]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: wyvrn

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
The real problem is what if we do get a rematch and Michigan wins? What a clusterf#ck that would be. Gotta love the BCS.

It wouldnt be a cluster ****** because Michigan would take both the AP and BCS title.

OSU wouldnt hold on to the #1 ranking in the AP with a loss to the #2 team.

And the winner of the BCS Title game is the winner of the BCS title.

How would it be a clusterfuck?

This is bullsh!t. I agree they played well against OSU, but they lost. The rest of their schedule hasn't been that impressive, so what is the overwhelming evidence that they whould remain #2?

Because USC hasnt played ND yet. The rankings dont take into account potential wins. USC lost to an UNRANKED team, they beat a crappy Nebraska team. Nebraska will finish the season unranked after a loss to Texas in the Big 12 title game.

As its been pointed out, Michigan has the best loss by a one-loss team and the best win by a one loss team. If USC wins out, its simple, they are in. How I think ND will upset them next week. Every team in control of its destiny has botched it the following week.

The best loss by a one-loss team? That is a really convaluted argument you have going. It sounds catchy but really proves nothing.

USC has played more than Nebraska and Oregon. They beat a good Cal team last night. They have a tough schedule and your argument here is ridiculous.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Wreckem

If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

Sweet.

Next year, the BCS title should be decided by zero games and your one-man poll.

My whole point is, all these people argue USC beat Arkansas, which was a ****** team to start the season.

If USC wants the benifits(which they get under the BCS system), of beating an unranked team at the time who is now #6, they need to take the egg of losing to an unranked team. Which thankfully they are. Anyone who loses to an unranked team does NOT deserve a title shot. Period. Its laughable. However if USC wins vs ND and UCLA, they are in.

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
The real problem is what if we do get a rematch and Michigan wins? What a clusterf#ck that would be. Gotta love the BCS.

Okay, so with your logic, if NBA team #1 swept NBA team #2 4-0 in a season series, but NBA team #2 beats NBA team #1 in a conference finals series, it's a clusterf#ck?

That analogy is so completely apples to oranges it's not even worth debating. Try again.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Wreckem
If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

That point is moot. Its like me saying "If USC had played Oregon St. today they would so get f'n owned."

Well if, USC gets the benifit of beating Arkansas, which was clearly not the same team they are now, at the begining of the season, they should take the negative effects of losing to an unranked team.

They dropped like 3 or 4 spots in the rankings after the loss. Using your argument, Oregon and Cal shouldn't have dropped in the rankings then since they lost to a team ranked higher than them?

 

[brxndxn]

UF only lost to the #2 (at the time) ranked team.. while USC lost to an unranked team.. WTF is USC ranked above UF?

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: brxndxn
UF only lost to the #2 (at the time) ranked team.. while USC lost to an unranked team.. WTF is USC ranked above UF?

maybe UF should not have played 1AA teams OOC next time?

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Wreckem
If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

That point is moot. Its like me saying "If USC had played Oregon St. today they would so get f'n owned."

Well if, USC gets the benifit of beating Arkansas, which was clearly not the same team they are now, at the begining of the season, they should take the negative effects of losing to an unranked team.

They dropped like 3 or 4 spots in the rankings after the loss.

Yes which keeps them at #3 in the BCS until they/if they beat ND.

So whats your point.

 

[b0mbrman]

Complete BCS rankings published here - Text

 

[wyvrn]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Wreckem

If USC played Arkansas today, they would so get f'in owned.

Sweet.

Next year, the BCS title should be decided by zero games and your one-man poll.

My whole point is, all these people argue USC beat Arkansas, which was a ****** team to start the season.

If USC wants the benifits(which they get under the BCS system), of beating an unranked team at the time who is now #6, they need to take the egg of losing to an unranked team. Which thankfully they are. Anyone who loses to an unranked team does NOT deserve a title shot. Period. Its laughable. However if USC wins vs ND and UCLA, they are in.

Ok, in the BCS world your argument tries to make sense. I see the pt. you are trying to make. But the real point is that the BCS system is crap. I can dismantle this argument 100 times by showing you teams that lost to lesser teams but went on to win championships. The facts are that in sports, even the best teams have off days. That doesn't mean they aren't good or we should just stop their seasons when they lose to a lesser team. And the problem with the BCS is it acts differently at the end of the season which is crap. It should be consistent throughout at least, and that means Michigan should not be #2 immediately after a loss.

 

[Balt]

USC has only played 10 games, UM has played 12.

If USC wins out in an impressive fashion, they will most likely jump Michigan in the BCS.