College Football - Championship Week

[CubColtPacer]

Gotta love that Michigan gets to go BCS instead of MSU because MSU beat Michigan (and therefore played another game).

 

I know that's been discussed ad nauseam, but it hasn't gotten any less stupid. And on top of it they draw the, at best, 8th best team of the other 9.

 

9 teams? There were only 7 teams left in the top 14 at that point-Arkansas, Boise, Kansas State, South Carolina, Va Tech, Baylor, and Georgia. And only 4 of those teams were even eligible.

[Andy]

Gotta love that Michigan gets to go BCS instead of MSU because MSU beat Michigan (and therefore played another game).

 

I know that's been discussed ad nauseam, but it hasn't gotten any less stupid. And on top of it they draw the, at best, 8th best team of the other 9.

 

9 teams? There were only 7 teams left in the top 14 at that point-Arkansas, Boise, Kansas State, South Carolina, Va Tech, Baylor, and Georgia. And only 4 of those teams were even eligible.

Other 9 teams = teams playing in BCS games

[shnsajax]

so one b12 team in the BCS? great system.

 

The Big 12 was surprisingly very good this year.

[SouthSideRyan]

Ball State and Western Kentucky the only eligible teams not to make a bowl.

[rawaction]

so one b12 team in the BCS? great system.

 

The Big 12 was surprisingly very good this year.

 

Surprisingly? They had the preseason 1, 8, and 9, not to mention 21 and 24. Texas and A&M didn't do as well as expected, but Baylor and KState picked up the slack. Pretty clear they were going to be the one of the top 2 conferences in football this year.

[Guest]

OSU didn't get the votes in the Harris or the extra computer poll. Even if one of Sagarin/Wolfe had OSU second also, Bama still would have been second (the margin would have been 0.0019).

[CubColtPacer]

Gotta love that Michigan gets to go BCS instead of MSU because MSU beat Michigan (and therefore played another game).

 

I know that's been discussed ad nauseam, but it hasn't gotten any less stupid. And on top of it they draw the, at best, 8th best team of the other 9.

 

9 teams? There were only 7 teams left in the top 14 at that point-Arkansas, Boise, Kansas State, South Carolina, Va Tech, Baylor, and Georgia. And only 4 of those teams were even eligible.

Other 9 teams = teams playing in BCS games

 

My mistake. I'd put Va Tech on about the same level as West Virginia or Clemson. Tech had matchup troubles against Clemson but played very well against every other team on their schedule while both Clemson and WV struggled for large stretches of the season. It is interesting to see that there are no real mismatches in the BCS this season (which of course was entirely random-the selections were all about money just like always).

[Exile on Waveland]

If it wasn't an SEC team, I bet OK State would have leaped over Alabama. In 2006 they pushed an SEC team over a Big Ten team because they didn't watch a rematch, but this year they apparently want a rematch because its an SEC team playing another SEC team.

 

It's almost the exact same scenario as 2006. BCS #1 Big Ten team narrowly beats BCS #2 Big Ten team. Michigan finds itself back at #2 and in line to have a rematch going into the last week. Maybe the quality of the teams Michigan beat was worse, who knows.

 

Little bit of a different scenario in 2006. First, the margin between Michigan and Florida in the polls to begin with was much, much smaller than the margin between Alabama and Oklahoma State. It's possible that more voters switched this time the final week than did in 2006, but since the decision was much more split to begin with in 06 tipped the balance. Also, Michigan after they lost was never #2 in the polls. After the Michigan loss, it was USC 2, Michigan 3, Florida 4. So the voters never had to decide whether they were willing to put Michigan 2 until the final week when USC lost, and that's when they decided to leave Michigan at 3 and flip Florida at 2. In Oklahoma State's case, they lost after Alabama did. Finally, a small factor might have been that Michigan was done after their loss and Florida still had 2 more chances to impress the voters.

 

Now, the SEC thing probably did have something to do with this rematch. I agree with that. But it's not a straight comparison to 2006 whatsoever.

 

You're splitting hairs. Nothing is ever a straight comparision; but this is about as close as it will ever get. The SEC plays by different rules. When it was the Big Ten, team No. 2 already had their chance and the title game should not feature rematches. When it was the SEC, the best two teams should play in the title game, regardless of whether it's a rematch.*

 

 

*For the record, I believe LSU and Alabama are the best two teams in the country. I have little problem with the rematch; I have a big problem with shifting goal posts.

[Andy]

If it wasn't an SEC team, I bet OK State would have leaped over Alabama. In 2006 they pushed an SEC team over a Big Ten team because they didn't watch a rematch, but this year they apparently want a rematch because its an SEC team playing another SEC team.

 

It's almost the exact same scenario as 2006. BCS #1 Big Ten team narrowly beats BCS #2 Big Ten team. Michigan finds itself back at #2 and in line to have a rematch going into the last week. Maybe the quality of the teams Michigan beat was worse, who knows.

 

Little bit of a different scenario in 2006. First, the margin between Michigan and Florida in the polls to begin with was much, much smaller than the margin between Alabama and Oklahoma State. It's possible that more voters switched this time the final week than did in 2006, but since the decision was much more split to begin with in 06 tipped the balance. Also, Michigan after they lost was never #2 in the polls. After the Michigan loss, it was USC 2, Michigan 3, Florida 4. So the voters never had to decide whether they were willing to put Michigan 2 until the final week when USC lost, and that's when they decided to leave Michigan at 3 and flip Florida at 2. In Oklahoma State's case, they lost after Alabama did. Finally, a small factor might have been that Michigan was done after their loss and Florida still had 2 more chances to impress the voters.

 

Now, the SEC thing probably did have something to do with this rematch. I agree with that. But it's not a straight comparison to 2006 whatsoever.

 

You're splitting hairs. Nothing is ever a straight comparision; but this is about as close as it will ever get. The SEC plays by different rules. When it was the Big Ten, team No. 2 already had their chance and the title game should not feature rematches. When it was the SEC, the best two teams should play in the title game, regardless of whether it's a rematch.*

 

 

*For the record, I believe LSU and Alabama are the best two teams in the country. I have little problem with the rematch; I have a big problem with shifting goal posts.

The bolded is the most important point. Oklahoma State had a much more impressive body of work than did Alabama, but since Bama had the 'better' loss and was in the SEC, they got the benefit of the doubt. ("Oklahoma State could NEVER move the ball on the almighty LSU defense! Ever!")

[CubColtPacer]

If it wasn't an SEC team, I bet OK State would have leaped over Alabama. In 2006 they pushed an SEC team over a Big Ten team because they didn't watch a rematch, but this year they apparently want a rematch because its an SEC team playing another SEC team.

 

It's almost the exact same scenario as 2006. BCS #1 Big Ten team narrowly beats BCS #2 Big Ten team. Michigan finds itself back at #2 and in line to have a rematch going into the last week. Maybe the quality of the teams Michigan beat was worse, who knows.

 

Little bit of a different scenario in 2006. First, the margin between Michigan and Florida in the polls to begin with was much, much smaller than the margin between Alabama and Oklahoma State. It's possible that more voters switched this time the final week than did in 2006, but since the decision was much more split to begin with in 06 tipped the balance. Also, Michigan after they lost was never #2 in the polls. After the Michigan loss, it was USC 2, Michigan 3, Florida 4. So the voters never had to decide whether they were willing to put Michigan 2 until the final week when USC lost, and that's when they decided to leave Michigan at 3 and flip Florida at 2. In Oklahoma State's case, they lost after Alabama did. Finally, a small factor might have been that Michigan was done after their loss and Florida still had 2 more chances to impress the voters.

 

Now, the SEC thing probably did have something to do with this rematch. I agree with that. But it's not a straight comparison to 2006 whatsoever.

 

You're splitting hairs. Nothing is ever a straight comparision; but this is about as close as it will ever get. The SEC plays by different rules. When it was the Big Ten, team No. 2 already had their chance and the title game should not feature rematches. When it was the SEC, the best two teams should play in the title game, regardless of whether it's a rematch.*

 

 

*For the record, I believe LSU and Alabama are the best two teams in the country. I have little problem with the rematch; I have a big problem with shifting goal posts.

The bolded is the most important point. Oklahoma State had a much more impressive body of work than did Alabama, but since Bama had the 'better' loss and was in the SEC, they got the benefit of the doubt. ("Oklahoma State could NEVER move the ball on the almighty LSU defense! Ever!")

 

I would argue it's more because Oklahoma State started outside the top 5 and had only one or maybe two high profile games before the last game of the season (Texas A&M-of course by the end of the year Kansas State and Baylor were better opponents than A&M). They never had any real chance for buzz. So voters did what they typically do. If Oklahoma had been the one to go 11-1 instead of Oklahoma State, they probably go to the title game instead of Alabama.

[shnsajax]

Paul Finebaum is a dumbass.

 

@finebaum Finebaum Network

Much heat leaving RG3 off my Heisman ballot. Nice player- but SEC defenses would have eaten him alive. Haters get a clue.

[Guest]

Finebaum is a professional troll, treat him as you would Skip Bayless.

[snoodmonger]

Paul Finebaum is a dumbass.

 

@finebaum Finebaum Network

Much heat leaving RG3 off my Heisman ballot. Nice player- but SEC defenses would have eaten him alive. Haters get a clue.

 

when RG3 goes on to excel in the NFL, he'll just say the SEC is a tougher league.

[SouthSideRyan]

Finebaum is a professional troll, treat him as you would Skip Bayless.

 

Man, you really became an SEC fanboy in a hurry.

[Guest]

Finebaum is a professional troll, treat him as you would Skip Bayless.

 

Man, you really became an SEC fanboy in a hurry.

 

I've been an EDSBS fanboy for longer.

[SouthSideRyan]

Finebaum is a professional troll, treat him as you would Skip Bayless.

 

Man, you really became an SEC fanboy in a hurry.

 

I've been an EDSBS fanboy for longer.

 

Isn't that the name of the conference Kansas is going to wind up in?