Who now for the title game? - Page 4

Oh8ch · #46 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 12:47 PM

I have two problems with rematches.

The refrain most commonly heard in lobbying for a playoff is to let the teams "prove it on the field".

So if it is Texas and OSU in Glendale let's cancel the game because there is nothing left to prove. Which leads to the second point.

A rematch is inherently unfair to the team that won the first time. We have already hung the Longhorn's scalp on our belt. If we win the second time we have nothing we didn't have already. If we lose it is as though the first game never happened.

I am OK with rematches provided there is third game if the first two have opposite results. That would be fair.

But you are correct, everyone sees it differently.

CCI · #47 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UpNorthBuckeye

the power of the alums and the television executives.

thats a major factor. After what Scum did to Norte Lame anything is possible in that crazy BCS sysytem they have

Oh8ch · #48 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 01:04 PM

Quite surprising when you look at the margins in those "one loss" games:

ND by 14
Texas by 17
Auburn by 17
Arkansas by 36
Cal by 17
Florida by 10

Among the contenders only USC losing by two can argue they were in a winnable game - and that one was not as close as the score indicates.

Really remarkable when you think about it.

I guess that's why I remarked.

And another good argument for the OSU-Michigan loser should that be a close game.

BuckeyeBill · #49 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cornerback6

I don't think there's anyway a serious voter could slate Rutgers (who in my opinion would get dominated) into the championship game. I have lost a ton of faith for the Big East especially on the defensive side of the ball after that ridiculous 1,000 yard game (WVU vs. UL). I think Rutgers is worthy of top 25 by all means, but championship game...no way.

I have to disagree regarding Rutgers. First thing, it is naive to think that the championship game consistently pits the 2 best teams in football. I suspect it rarely does that (although last year, it probably did). And in fact, in no sport do you typically get the 2 best teams at the end of the seaon. You get who earned it, which means sometimes lesser teams beat better teams. Teams get better or worse as the season progresses, so I am not sure you could even define what it means to be the better team.

IF (really big if because I doubt they will do it) Rutgers wins out, they will have beat a #3 team and a #10 team. Their SOS may be not quite as good as many other teams, but its not that much worse. And the fact of the matter is they will have won all their games, which the other schools can't claim. It would be a travesty for a team to have run the table, beat several top 25 teams, and be passed up by teams that didn't (or couldn't) run the table. All the other 1 loss teams have looked pretty weak in several of their games. If Rutgers can't get in with a perfect season, we're really saying there is an entire class of football teams that are simply not worthy of ever playing for the MNC. I think that is bull[censored]. Again, its not like their SOS was THAT bad.

I personally think that if they make it to Glendale, they will have their asses handed to them. But they will have earned the right to be there.

By the way, Thursday night the Rutgers D looked outstanding against a pretty good Louisville offense.

Oh8ch · #50 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Teams get better or worse as the season progresses, so I am not sure you could even define what it means to be the better team.

This is the problematic issue for any championship IMO. Who are you crowning? Any sport with a playoff crowns whoever is playing best that day/week/month.

Traditionally CFB has looked at the best team that season. I like that.

Flawed as they are polls - human or computer - probably address that better than even the single championship game we have now. Who was the best team in the country last season if Vince Young was injured on the last play of the Big XII Championship game? Were the baseball Cardinals better than the Tigers this year, or did the Tigers beat themselves by playing well, winning early, and sitting for a week?

Ultimately we are trying to prove the unprovable. I am opposed to a playoff because I hate to see the regular season discounted in the name of making a vain attempt.

Quote:

IF (really big if because I doubt they will do it) Rutgers wins out, they will have beat a #3 team and a #10 team.

Similar to the arugment above. If those two opponents drop out of the top 10 by the end of the year how much credit do you give Rutgers? Was Louisville really #3, or were the polls wrong (or rather incomplete) at the time?

mooktarr · #51 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 01:43 PM

USC wins out and goes, both on SOS and talkingheads promos because there is a lot of money to be made. This could be "a game that could/should have been" last year. Everyone would be ranting about this game. The sos willl put them above Fla and Tex even if those two win out.

endzoneBucki · #52 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 01:55 PM

That is a good point regarding USC. I believe Rutgers should go if they win out. They would deserve it.

t_BuckeyeScott · #53 (**permalink**) 11-11-2006, 06:10 PM

Auburn's out... I agree with what O8ch said about the rematches. Its not fair to the winner... Its very hard to beat a good team twice... I'm not saying we would lose to UT the 2nd time around I just don't want to think about it.

Now if UF wins it should be a solid 3 in the BCS because they'll move up in the polls and have better computer numbers than UT. UF is the team I think that benefits from Rutgers and Georgia wins. However its 7-7 now.