Good read on how Michigan was boned.

[Scary Good]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2685195


If you're Michigan coach Lloyd Carr, how do you explain to your players that they won't be in the BCS Championship Game? How do you tell the second-best team in the country to get pumped about playing USC in the Runner-Up Bowl? How do you resist the urge of wishing Nutcracker drills on every person who jumped one-loss Florida ahead of the one-loss Wolverines in the final polls?


There is no polite way of saying it: Michigan got jobbed. Sunday's rankings are Exhibits A-Z why the BCS means well, but simply doesn't work -- and never will.

Carr had to do what Auburn's Tommy Tuberville did two seasons ago. Tuberville's team finished the regular season 12-0, but was left out of the Tostitos BCS Championship Game in favor of undefeated USC and Oklahoma.

"It's hard," said Tuberville. "It's hard to look them in the eye. Heck, we're still not over it. You never get over it. It's like a question that's never been answered."

Carr is asking those same questions. And he'll get the same shoulder shrugs that Tuberville got.

Let me get this straight: Michigan, which was unbeaten against all teams on its schedule ranked lower than No. 1, isn't going to Glendale, Ariz., for the Jan. 8 national title game because ...

• It didn't win its conference.

No, it didn't. But did you see who did? Team by the name of Ohio State. Maybe you've heard of the Buckeyes? Undefeated. Ranked first in the country. Beat Michigan in Columbus by the grand total of three whole points.

And feel free to show me in the BCS handbook where it says you've got to win your conference to play in the championship game?

• Nobody wants to see a rematch.

Just asking, but how did Ali-Frazier II and III work out? Or that Georgetown-Villanova Final Four?

I know Florida's Urban Meyer doesn't want to see a rematch, but he's not exactly an impartial observer, is he? And if Meyer were in Carr's Nikes, I guarantee you his objections to a second Ohio State-Michigan game would have disappeared.

A rematch, this time on a neutral field, would have been a game for the ages. And if you threatened to take away his precious sweater vest if he didn't tell the truth, I bet you Buckeyes' coach Jim Tressel would rather play Florida than have to face the Wolverines again (Tressel declined to vote in the final coaches' poll).

• Florida played a tougher schedule.

Agreed. But strength of schedule is part of the equation, nothing more. Tuberville's 2004 team had the strongest strength of schedule, but didn't make it.

You want to give the Gators the edge based on scheduling? Fair enough, though you could argue that Florida didn't exactly beat vintage Alabama, Georgia and Florida State teams this year, and Central Florida and Division I-AA Western Carolina were dreadful.

And look at the one loss each suffered by Florida and Michigan on their schedules. You tell me which defeat was more impressive: the Gators' 10-point road loss to an Auburn team that finished the season No. 9 in the BCS standings? Or the Wolverines' three-point road loss to an Ohio State now favored to win the national championship?

• The BCS system rewarded Florida for finishing its season with wins at FSU and against Arkansas at the SEC championship in Atlanta.

And the BCS penalized Michigan twice for being on the wrong end of the calendar: once when USC moved to No. 2 after beating Notre Dame (even though Michigan beat the Irish worse), and now, when Florida overtook the Wolverines (even though U of M's season ended two weeks ago).

How can you call this a "system" when Florida belongs to a league that plays a conference championship, and Michigan doesn't? How can you call it a quasi-playoff when Michigan drops twice in the standings without losing a game.

• Florida has earned the right to play Ohio State.

Absolutely true. But so has Michigan.

Ask the coaches at Vanderbilt (the Commodores played both Michigan and Florida this season) who is the better team, and the consensus pick -- privately, of course -- is the Wolverines. Florida has more speed and a handful of players to die for, they say, but Michigan is more physical, would control both sides of the line of scrimmage, have wonderful wide receivers, and are led by a senior quarterback who doesn't make many mistakes.

Ask them who would give Ohio State the better game, and you'll get the same answer.

Tuberville voted Ohio State, Florida and then Michigan on his final ballot. "But I watched Michigan this year," he said. "Heck, I think they could beat anybody. But that's the way the system is. It's a screwed-up system."

Michigan never had that chance. It was 11-1 on Nov. 18. It was 11-1 on Dec. 3. But between then and now the Wolverines apparently became the cellulite queens and somehow lost the swimsuit portion of this ridiculous BCS beauty pageant.

Michigan didn't do a thing wrong. And yet Carr was the one who had to console his team Sunday night. He did it, but here's guessing he wasn't Mr. Congeniality.

Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com.

[Carl J. Ironsides]

I don't have any sympathy for Michigan. They had a chance to beat OSU and didn't do it. That said, there should absolutely be a playoff. It will happen eventually, but these college presidents keep delaying the inevitable.

[BLeonard]

Well, look at what I just found...
http://www.pollg.com/g/w27236/w27236gateway.htm

This is the list of panelists that voted in the Harris poll, with each individual's top 25...These were interesting...

Tim Neverett
No. 1: Ohio State
No. 2: Florida
No. 3: USC
No. 4: Michigan

Ray Melick
No. 1: Ohio State
No. 2: Florida
No. 3: Louisville
No. 4: Michigan

Gene Ponti
No. 1: Ohio State
No. 2: Florida
No. 3: LSU
No. 4: Michigan

Paul Zeise
No. 1: Ohio State
No. 2: Louisville
No. 3: Florida
No. 4: Michigan

And, the kicker...

Jim Walden
No. 1: Florida
No. 2: Ohio State
No. 3: Michigan
No. 4: Oklahoma

This is what's wrong with college football... USC loses to two unranked teams and Neverett puts them ahead of Michigan.

Melick, Zeise... where did Louisville come from? Same question for Gene Pont regarding LSU.

Jim Walden should have his voting rights revoked. Putting a 1 loss team over an undefeated.

Great BCS system we got... Looks easy as hell to manipulate it.

-Bill

[Scary Good]

Those are SHIT...wtf?

[TheAnswer74]

I don't have any sympathy for Michigan. They had a chance to beat OSU and didn't do it. That said, there should absolutely be a playoff. It will happen eventually, but these college presidents keep delaying the inevitable.

As soon as you say that you are wrong. Thats not the system. The sytem is wrong, but thats not how it works. Thats why EVERYONE who says that or they didnt win their conference is wrong.

This is the 1st time I can remember a team being ranked #2 in every poll and dropping in the BCS because they didnt play. Add that to the fact every publication felt Michigan was the 2nd best team in the country after the Ohio State game.

Add that to the fact that if anyone watch the SEC championship game they would know Florida is not on the same level as Michigan and Ohio State.

Florida is on National TV almost every week and every week the voters thought Michigan was better. The ony weeks the voters thought differently was when Michigan didnt play.

Thats where my problem is. How does Michigan drop in the rankings the last 2 weeks? They lost by 3, in a very exciting football game, to the team those same voters picked #1. Michigan impressed the voters so much that game that they didnt even fall in the rankings, even though both Florida and USC won that same week.

Its BS.

[Carl J. Ironsides]

The BCS is BS, Answer. College football will never truly be right about its champion until there is a playoff system.

[nyjunc]

For the millionth time Mich had a creampuff sched, they played 1 big time team all year and LOST in a game that wsn't anywhere near as close as the final score indicated. They scored a late TD, they were down double digits much of the game.

[WhiteRabbit]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2685195


If you're Michigan coach Lloyd Carr, how do you explain to your players that they won't be in the BCS Championship Game?

Well, look at what I just found...
http://www.pollg.com/g/w27236/w27236gateway.htm

This is the list of panelists that voted in the Harris poll, with each individual's top 25...These were interesting...This is what's wrong with college football... USC loses to two unranked teams and Neverett puts them ahead of Michigan.

Melick, Zeise... where did Louisville come from? Same question for Gene Pont regarding LSU.

Jim Walden should have his voting rights revoked. Putting a 1 loss team over an undefeated.

Great BCS system we got... Looks easy as hell to manipulate it.

-Bill

Those are SHIT...wtf?

As soon as you say that you are wrong. Thats not the system. The sytem is wrong, but thats not how it works. Thats why EVERYONE who says that or they didnt win their conference is wrong.

This is the 1st time I can remember a team being ranked #2 in every poll and dropping in the BCS because they didnt play. Add that to the fact every publication felt Michigan was the 2nd best team in the country after the Ohio State game.

Add that to the fact that if anyone watch the SEC championship game they would know Florida is not on the same level as Michigan and Ohio State.

Florida is on National TV almost every week and every week the voters thought Michigan was better. The ony weeks the voters thought differently was when Michigan didnt play.

Thats where my problem is. How does Michigan drop in the rankings the last 2 weeks? They lost by 3, in a very exciting football game, to the team those same voters picked #1. Michigan impressed the voters so much that game that they didnt even fall in the rankings, even though both Florida and USC won that same week.

Its BS.

The BCS is BS, Answer. College football will never truly be right about its champion until there is a playoff system.

:cryn: :cryingeyesout: :bigcry:

[TheAnswer74]

For the millionth time Mich had a creampuff sched, they played 1 big time team all year and LOST in a game that wsn't anywhere near as close as the final score indicated. They scored a late TD, they were down double digits much of the game.

Everyone who saw the game except Ohio State fans and you dont agree with that statement.

Ive said it a bunch of times, 35-31, Ohio State throws an incomplete pass making it 4th an 15. AFTER the throw Michigan was called with a roughing the passer. There was 6 minutes left and Michigan was getting the football back. Ohio state had around 500 yards, Michigan had 430 yards. Michigan scored on 6 of 12 possessions, Ohio State scored on 6 of 12 possessions.

Plus, Ohio State had an easier schedule, especially if you think Michigan isnt good.

[TheAnswer74]

:cryn: :cryingeyesout: :bigcry:

And? So what if Michigan fans are crying? FLorida was crying weeks ago.

Someone was going to complain about the outcome.

[shiva2999]

Michigan got screwed.

They're a WAY better team than Florida.

[TheAnswer74]

Remember, Auburn never was #2 in 2004, They never passed Oklahoma and USC.

Michigan passed Florida and USC before their schedule was up, they fell in the rankings only when they werent playing.

[Wing Eater]

Michigan got screwed.

They're a WAY better team than Florida.

But they weren't conference champions! It would be totally screwed up for Michigan to say "we are the best team in the country, but not the best team in our conference." Sorry but if you don't win your conference, then your automatically eliminated from a national championship in my mind.

[Carl J. Ironsides]

And? So what if Michigan fans are crying? FLorida was crying weeks ago.

Someone was going to complain about the outcome.

White's accusing me of being a crybaby, even though I'm just being objective. For the record, I can't stand, OSU, Fla. or Mich.

I've said that Florida deserves to be in the game, WR, but college football needs a playoff nonetheless. Even Urban Meyer said it after his team was given a bid to the title game: there needs to be a playoff.

[TheAnswer74]

But they weren't conference champions! It would be totally screwed up for Michigan to say "we are the best team in the country, but not the best team in our conference." Sorry but if you don't win your conference, then your automatically eliminated from a national championship in my mind.

That doesnt make any sense if the #1 ranked team is in your conference.

Would Florida beat Ohio State @ Ohio State? Would anyone? If Oho State is the BEST team in the country, then how is losing to Auburn the same as losing to Ohio State.

Without an SEC championship, Florida doesnt win their conference either, they would have tied.

[HURLS]

Maybe Tressel should have grown a set and voted.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/sportsline/main9849348.shtml

[shiva2999]

Why isn't it feasible that the top two teams could be in the same conference?

[BLeonard]

But they weren't conference champions! It would be totally screwed up for Michigan to say "we are the best team in the country, but not the best team in our conference." Sorry but if you don't win your conference, then your automatically eliminated from a national championship in my mind.

You know how sick I am of hearing and seeing that argument? Here's why:

First off, Div-I College Football is the ONLY sport that doesn't have some sort of playoff system. There's nothing to compare it to. Wild Card teams have participated and won championships when they failed to win their divisions, and, in College Football, that's basically what conferences are... Divisions.

Second, Isn't there a team out there named Notre Dame that's won a couple National Titles, and they obviously didn't win their conference, now did they? Hell, they don't even HAVE a conference to win!

And, I haven't read anywhere that ANYONE has said that Michigan is the "best team in the country." They do, however, have a very legitamate claim to being the #2 team in the country and, the BCS was to put the #1 team vs the #2 team... Not two conference champions, not a game that isn't a rematch, but the #1 team vs the #2 team.

Look at the Harris poll voting I posted before. One voter voted USC with 2 losses against unranked teams ahead of Michigan, who had one loss against the #1 team. Other voters put Louisville and LSU ahead of Michigan. And, there was one guy who put Florida at #1... How do you justify ANY of those people's votes? Those 5 voters ALONE created a 9 point gap between Florida and Michigan... A huge advantage when you consider how close the end result was.

I'm not saying that Florida does not deserve to be there. I'm saying that this system was supposed to put #1 vs #2. Period. That system failed miserably this weekend, due to these "voters" who are supposed to be objective.

Let me throw this question out... Say Michigan and OSU didn't play this season and both ended up 12-0, or even 11-1. Who do you put in the title game? Can't be Michigan OR OSU, since they would have shared their conference Championship and, we all know from your earlier statement that "if you don't win your conference, then your automatically eliminated from a national championship."

Another question... If USC hadn't lost, would Florida have jumped Michigan? I doubt it. So, now, you've penalized Michigan because USC lost. Sounds pretty stupid.

The BCS could have avoided all controversy by simply voting Florida #3 BEFORE the SEC Championship game. They didn't... Why? Because nobody thought USC would lose, thus making it a moot point. Only after USC lost did you hear ANY serious talk about Florida playing in the National Championship. Even the SEC Championship broadcasters didn't say much about it until after halftime, once they learned USC had lost. Then, if you watch the game, you'll notice that the broadcasters really turn up the "Florida should be in the National Championship" talk... Nevermind the fact that Florida went right out ant promptly lost the lead.

Straight simple. This was the voters not wanting a rematch. I'm sure that the SEC is gonna see a few extra bucks from having one of their teams in the Championship too, not to mention the fact that the SEC commissioner was on the BCS committee. Because, when all is said and done, all college football is to them is a business in which serious money is made.

-Bill

[nyjunc]

Why isn't it feasible that the top two teams could be in the same conference?

It is but based upon this season how could you say Mich was the 2nd best team? B/c they lost just once w/ a creampuff sched? They played tight games w/ a few bad big 10 teams and a bad MAC team. the highlight of the Mich season was losing by "only 3" at OSU. If Mich dominated their sched then maybe I'd agree, if mich played a tougher sched and came out w/ 1 loss then maybe I'd agree but against that sched compared to what UF had to face UF w/o question deserves to play OSU.

[shiva2999]

It is but based upon this season how could you say Mich was the 2nd best team? B/c they lost just once w/ a creampuff sched? They played tight games w/ a few bad big 10 teams and a bad MAC team. the highlight of the Mich season was losing by "only 3" at OSU. If Mich dominated their sched then maybe I'd agree, if mich played a tougher sched and came out w/ 1 loss then maybe I'd agree but against that sched compared to what UF had to face UF w/o question deserves to play OSU.

Sorry, I couldn't watch every game but I did watch Michigan make ND look useless and watched a great game with OSU.

Florida I watched a couple of times too and they didn't look nearly as good as Michigan. I like Fla's wr Andre Caldwell though.

[BLeonard]

It is but based upon this season how could you say Mich was the 2nd best team? B/c they lost just once w/ a creampuff sched? They played tight games w/ a few bad big 10 teams and a bad MAC team. the highlight of the Mich season was losing by "only 3" at OSU. If Mich dominated their sched then maybe I'd agree, if mich played a tougher sched and came out w/ 1 loss then maybe I'd agree but against that sched compared to what UF had to face UF w/o question deserves to play OSU.

Florida was 47th in strength of schedule, Michigan was 53rd, and Ohio State's was 101st... So, you think Ohio State should get to play in the National Title game? Sure, they went undefeated, but they played all creampuffs, right?

You can only affect your own schedule so much. You HAVE to play the conference schedule. Look at the teams OUT of Conference... Michigan played Notre Dame on the road, while Florida was playing the almighty University of Central Florida and Western Carolina.

And, what "tight games" are you referring to? Michigan's smallest margin of victory was 7, and that was at Penn State. Meanwhile, 5 of Florida's wins were by 7 points or less, 2 of them by ONE point. So, sounds like Michigan "dominated" a lot more than Florida did.

-Bill

[Merk]

College football is quickly turning into boxing

[TRIPLE P]

I've been pretty indifferent about who the Buckeyes play since the Michigan game, because I;m of the opinion that it doesn't matter because nobody is gonna stop all our weapons on offense.

But, Michigan fans, could it be that voters looked at the big picture.... Michigans biggest victory was on the road against ND.....ND goes on to get crushed at USC, then USC loses to UCLA....

That sorta diminishes Michigans biggest victory.

[TheAnswer74]

I've been pretty indifferent about who the Buckeyes play since the Michigan game, because I;m of the opinion that it doesn't matter because nobody is gonna stop all our weapons on offense.

But, Michigan fans, could it be that voters looked at the big picture.... Michigans biggest victory was on the road against ND.....ND goes on to get crushed at USC, then USC loses to UCLA....

That sorta diminishes Michigans biggest victory.

Notre Dame beat UCLA, UCLA beat USC, USC crushed ND.

Another one.

USC crushed Arkansas, Arkansas beats Auburn, Auburn beats Florida, Florida beats Arkansas.

Playoff please!


We will find out a lot though during the Bowls. Penn State vs Tennessee, Wisconsin vs Arkansas, Notre Dame vs LSU, USC vs Michigan, Ohio State vs Florida.

Everyone talks about how good the SEC is and how bad the big ten is, well we will find out.

[TRIPLE P]

We will find out a lot though during the Bowls. Penn State vs Tennessee, Wisconsin vs Arkansas, Notre Dame vs LSU, USC vs Michigan, Ohio State vs Florida.

Everyone talks about how good the SEC is and how bad the big ten is, well we will find out.

I agree.... I, in know way, am saying the SEC isn't a very tough conference.... but just because a collection of well matched teams play close game doesn't mean they're a step ahead of everyone else.

[ckg68]

Personally,it doesn't matter whether Michigan or Florida is in the BCS championship game. Either team will be little more than a speedbump in Ohio State's way to winning the title.

Over to the bowl games...

I could never understand why TPTB were so adamantly against a playoff system for D-1 football,when EVERY other collegiate sport at every level has one. "Oh,it'll affect the students and their studies and finals...." :bs: Well,if that's the case,why do we have an assload of bowl games that don't mean crap? Besides the obvious answers....money and gambling.

Want to make it meaningful? Here's what you do: Take 15 of the bowl games and use them to put the top 16 BCS teams into it....1-16,2-15 and so on for the first round. Every year,one of the Big 4 bowls should be the designated title game,as it is now....but with the winners of each 8 team bracket.

[Wing Eater]

Why isn't it feasible that the top two teams could be in the same conference?

It is perfectly feasible, but allowing a team that lost the conference title in the natinoal title game discredits the whole conference system. So IMO you should never allow a 2nd place team of a conference in the title game or you should trash the conference system entirely and have 116 independent schools...either one is fine by me, but don't permit a situation where a second place team wins the national championship.

[TheAnswer74]

It is perfectly feasible, but allowing a team that lost the conference title in the natinoal title game discredits the whole conference system. So IMO you should never allow a 2nd place team of a conference in the title game or you should trash the conference system entirely and have 116 independent schools...either one is fine by me, but don't permit a situation where a second place team wins the national championship.

You should never allow a 2nd place team ONLY if there is a conference championship.

I have seen teams lose in the regular season and then win the conference championship. In reality, they would be 2nd place without a conference championship game.

[35Pete]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y241/35Pete/wine.gif

[bozman949]

Wisconsin is the team that got jobbed.

[nyjunc]

Wisconsin is the team that got jobbed.

Wisconsin is lucky they are even ranked, they have a great record b/c of the sched they faced. Outside of the Mich game Boise State faced a tougher sched than Wisconsin. Wisc beat Bowling Green, West. illinois, SD State(last I checked Marshall Faulk didn't play for SDSU), Indiana, NW, Minny, Purdue, illinois, PSU, Iowa and Buffalo. Please, they didn't beat a single halfway decent team let alone a good team.

[TheAnswer74]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y241/35Pete/wine.gif

Isnt it a shame when wine is all we can do?

I keep saying it, but I dont understand how voters can keep Michigan at #2 after they lost to the #1 team on a week both Florida and USC won, but then when Michigan isnt playing, they drop Michigan in the polls. I think they kept Michigan at #2 because they felt Michigan was the #2 team in the country. They get punished because Florida gets an extra game. We wouldnt be having this talk if Michigan had an extra game, because that extra game would have been Michigan vs Ohio State in the big ten championship game.

We want to make new rules, how about you cant move a team up or down in the polls unless they play. I like this one even better, EVERY conference must have a championship game.