I just don't see what Michigan did to fall from #2, based on the rest of the candidates records. It's as if a lot of the pollsters had their mind made up that no matter what USC was a better team than Michigan if USC wins against Cal and Michigan loses to Ohio State, and obviously that's preposterous.

USC - please. A loss to Oregon State? They should've packed up and gone home as soon as they walked off of that field. The bigger travesty would be to put USC in the title game with a loss like that on their report card.

Florida lost to Auburn, and Auburn's not even in the top ten. I know a loss to Auburn is not a bad loss at all, but it isn't a loss to OSU.

Also, obviously any discussion about Notre Dame in this thread should be limited to the ramifications of an upset against USC.

I guess I should scroll down the page a little more before posting, huh

With Michigan, if you can't win your conference, you don't get to win the NC. This includes Nebraska.

Florida also defeated #13 Tennessee, #9 LSU and #5 Arkansas if they win out.

Michigan defeated #2 Notre Dame and a then unranked Wisconsin team, who hasn't beaten a ranked opponent all season.

Arkansas would defeat #2 Auburn, #13 Tennessee, #9 LSU and #4 Florida if they win out. I'm pulling for the Hogs, but I really don't think this is their year. I'd probably rather have them lose to either LSU or Florida and be a year older and more experienced. They also got spanked at home by USC in the first game of the season.

Even with the USC loss to Oregon State, I don't really have any beef with them in the NC game. Even if they beat USC, Notre Dame still has a pathetic schedule.

I defer to Fu.

Good point about not winning your conference.
However, it was a CLOSE loss ON THE ROAD, to the NUMBER ONE team in the nation.
I agree with SK, in that the loss does not deserve a drop in ranking.

And maybe it does deserve a remach for the NC at a neutral location.
If it was a home loss for MU, I could see the drop. But not this.

It's not necessarily a contest of who has the best lost. There are other factors as well. Let's be honest, the Big 10 is pretty crappy this year. Only having 1 loss in that conference isn't unbelieveable. I honestly believe that if Arkansas played Michigan's schedule that they'd only have 1 loss to OSU as well. And in all honestly, Michigan had their chance at OSU. Let's try someone else. Also most people were crying a couple of years ago when OK played in the NC without winning their conference (and i agreed) but now it seems like that isn't important anymore.

So the two best teams in the country cannot reside in the same conference by definition

Pretty stupid argument.

Did OK lose to the #1 team in the country? How is that even comparable? The "not winning your own conference" argument sucks when you are talking about #1 vs. #2. Too bad USC and Florida couldn't just take care of fucking business earlier in the year against teams they should have beaten if they wanted stronger NC consideration.

Also, I reiterate:

Boise State has been taking care of business all season. Why aren't we talking about them?

I'll be a lot more open to this idea if/when Arkansas wins out. USC/FL/AK all have two games to play, so a lot can happen.

Personal opinion: Michigan probably beats OSU on a neutral field 7 out of 10 times. OSU would have dropped to fourth under USC and Florida had they lost. The best team doesn't always win the championship, but the premise we all share is that the two best teams should play in the championship based on how they perform.

The Big Ten is certainly top-heavy, but Purdue has a chance to redeem themselves at Hawaii this Saturday. They, Penn State (#25 in BCS, w00t!) and Wisconsin will have the opportunity to prove their worth in bowl games. It may be too little too late, but at least with hindsight it will give us some more perspective on how good OSU and Michigan really are.

7 out of 10 is not correct. I believe it's more like 4 out of 10, actually, but that's still significant enough to warrant a rematch. Did you look at the yardage statistics for the game? I believe OSU never trailed after the first quarter yet was minus 3 in turnovers. The funny thing is that by the box score, OSU should've won by 14, but Michigan somehow kept themselves in the game despite getting beaten because they grabbed fumbles and made an improbable pick. They also scored whenever they absolutely had to.

I think the question becomes of conference strength. I think the SEC has a fair arguement that it is the best in the nation and therefore their champion should have the right to see if it is better than the Big 10's. We know that Michigan is not better than OSU because it's been decided on a field. Florida & Arkansas had to play a murderous scheduled filled with top 10 teams and top 20 teams. The chances of them being beaten through that stretch is greater than playing 2 games against highly ranked teams.

I wouldn't say Auburn is a team Florida "should" have beaten anymore than OSU is a team Michigan should have beaten. Auburn was a legit NC contender for almost all of the season.

Now that's just stupid. I'd venture to say that most teams in the top 10 could probably beat OSU on a neutral field at least around 3 or 4 times. But this isn't baseball. It's what you do when it counts with the spotlight on. Is playing on the road againt the #1 team a disadvantage? Sure. But so is playing 4 top ten teams at the time on the road like LSU. All of which were top 5 at some point in the season. To be honest I think LSU would win 6 out of 10 in all of those games if it were on a neutral field. What does that mean? Absolutely nothing.

It means something in terms of who you expect to win an upcoming game and who actually does. Every anti-rematch argument runs on the assumption that USC/FL/AK will win out because they are better on-paper than their upcoming opponents. I would not object to any of those three playing in the national championship if they win out, and I also think that will reflect in the computer ranking and actually manifest that way in the NC. The problem is that none of those three teams have won out yet. Michigan is nearly-equal-to-or-better than every other one-loss team still in contention for the NC right now. That can easily change in two weeks time.

Disagree. LSU is currently a 1.5 favored on the road against Arkansas. I think every anti-rematch assumption is based only on IF you win out regardless.


. [quote]

I'd say equal to. And that's the whole point. We're trying to say who has a better resume of equal teams. I personally believe if you play 4-5 games against highly ranked teams and drop 1 than you should have the chance over someone who has played 2 and dropped 1.

Well said, and point conceded. Spade started this as to "Why did Michigan drop this week?" (teams played), and the topic shifted to "Should Michigan play in the NC if other teams win out?" (teams played and yet-to-play). In my mind, they are separate conversations.

True dat.

Come on. Then-rankings don't matter, and you know it. Obviously we have a better idea where a team is ranked later in the season than when when they are fucking 2-0 or 3-0. As for not beating a ranked opponent all season, that's incorrect. Penn State is currently ranked 25th in the BCS, and they beat them. Again, then-rankings don't matter anymore, because they were incomplete information. Did Wisconsin have a soft schedule? Maybe. Let's talk about 10 of the other top 25 teams too, starting with Rutgers, Boise State, West Virginia, Louisville, BYU, Clemson....

Can we at least agree USC should be disqualified from playing in the NC for losing to Oregon State? And yet they are the frontrunner. Somebody should firebomb the creator of the BCS.

I'm pretty ambivalent about the SEC. On the one hand, yes it's a tough conference. On the other hand, Florida scheduled two high school opponents during the season. It must be nice to have that many byes all year.

Why are people continually saying "unranked" Wisconsin when the rankings at the time no longer matter? Clearly Wisconsin is one of the ten best teams in the country. By the current BCS rankings, Michigan has played three top EIGHT teams. Can Florida say that? No. Florida hasn't even played ONE top eight team.

rematch

Yeah lets do a rematch, that way if Ohio State loses they have as much claim the National title as Michigan does

Michiagn
Vanderbilt 12:00 - Not qualitity opponent
Central Michigan 1:00 - Not qualitiy opponent
at Notre Dame 3:30 - Highly Ranked Team
Wisconsin 12:00 - Highly Ranked TEam
Minnesota 8:00 - average
Michigan State 4:30 - below average
Penn State 8:00 - average
Iowa 3:30 - below average
Northwestern 3:30 - aveage (and I feel I'm being generous)
Ball State 1:00 - Not qualitiy
Indiana 12:00 - Not qualitity
Ohio State 12:10 - Highly Ranked Team
3 real quality wins. 3 nice wins. I wouldn't count the rest.

Florida
Southern Miss. - Below average
UCF W 42-0 2-0 - below aveage
at Tennessee W -ranked team
Kentucky W - Below Average
Alabama W - Average
LSU W - Highly Ranked Team
at Auburn Highly Ranked Team
at Georgia1 (CBS) Average
Vanderbilt (LF Sports) Below AVerage
South Carolina Above Average
Western Carolina Not quality opponent
Florida State - below average
Arkansas - Highly Ranked
4 real quality wins, 3 nice wins.
In retrospect Florida's schedule is less impressive than I remembered.

you're right, but they are the two best teams in the country...

neutral field vs. home field.

It wasn't the point. It was just a statement of fact. The more important part followed the phrase that you emphasised: Wisconsin has not beaten a ranked opponent all season.