W/ Louisville losing, do you guys now think the national title game will be a rematch of Michigan-Ohio State?? I do
as long as texas isnt in it, i hate texas with a HUGE passion...first they screw CAL over a couple years ago, and now they are in line to be the #3 team when they dont deserve it at all
How do they not deserve it?? They've only lost 1 game and that was to OSU. Colt McCoy is doing really good.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jon_Vilma @ Nov 9 2006, 11:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moose87 @ Nov 9 2006, 09:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, this clears the Buckeyes path to the national title game. IMO now, it will be a rematch of Michigan-Ohio State</div>Depends on how close it is. If it's a 2 score or more victory, no chance in hell is it a rematch.Texas lost 24-7 early in the season and then went undefeated. If Michigan loses 24-7 or even 21-7, you have to give Texas the nod because of the early-vs late loss.IMO if Michigan loses by a decent margain it's Texas first with the long shot going to Cal (assuming both win out).Also if Ohio State loses by a decent margain and Notre Dame wins out then they are in a battle with Texas for the Championship game. Notre Dame lost by 26 points to Michigan.For A and B it's assuming Texas and Notre Dame win out:A. Michigan wins big: Notre Dame - Michigan in the big game.B. Ohio State wins big: Texas - Ohio State in the big game.C. Michigan/Ohio State wins/loses close: Michigan - Ohio State in the big gameD. Michigan wins big but Notre Dame loses and Texas wins out: Cal or Texas in the big game with MichiganE. Ohio State wins big but Texas loses and Notre Dame wins out: Cal or Notre Dame in the big game with OSU.F. Ohio State/Michigan wins/loses big and both ND and Texas lose: Cal vs the winner of the OSU - Michigane matchupIt's not over by a long shot. Cal has a legit shot because they lost early to a good team (Tennessee) and have been studly since whereas So. Cal. lost to Oregon State. I can't see putting a 1 loss team who lost to a team like Oregon State ahead of a 1-loss team who lost to a ranked team. Even if So. Cal. beats Cal and Notre Dame, they still lost to Oregon State whereas Texas lost to Ohio State, Florida lost to Auburn, Auburn lost to Arkansas, Rutgers could even go undefeated and if they do I'd probably want them ahead of So. Cal. as well considering they'd have beated WVU and Louisville.</div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 9 2006, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If any one loss win gets in over any Undefeated team, it will be a joke.</div>Even if the undefeated team is Rutgers or Boise State?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moose87 @ Nov 9 2006, 10:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How do they not deserve it?? They've only lost 1 game and that was to OSU. Colt McCoy is doing really good.</div>Someone on the Titans board (now has lots of Longhorn fans cuz of VY) posted McCoy's stats vs Troy Smith's...McCoy's passer rating isn't much less and his rushing stats are better than Smith's.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeefunk @ Nov 10 2006, 07:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 9 2006, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If any one loss win gets in over any Undefeated team, it will be a joke.</div>Even if the undefeated team is Rutgers or Boise State?</div>If Rutgers does go undefeated in a major conference (Big East), then yes. I just dont see how you can give a spot in the National Championship game to a 1-loss team over a team that went Undefeated in a Major Conference, especially when they would have proved themselves in the Process with wins over both West Virginia and Louisville. I could understand giving Boise State the snub when they are playing in the WAC, but to a Big East team? Cmon.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moose87 @ Nov 10 2006, 09:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What about a one-loss SEC team?? That confrence is brutal</div>It is a brutal conference, but they still lost a game. No other sport in America gives a team a better seed when having a worse record. This would be like Giving the Giants a #1 seed in the NFC Playoffs because they have a harder schedule, despite the Bears having a better record. It just doesn't make any sense.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 10 2006, 11:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moose87 @ Nov 10 2006, 09:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What about a one-loss SEC team?? That confrence is brutal</div>It is a brutal conference, but they still lost a game. No other sport in America gives a team a better seed when having a worse record. This would be like Giving the Giants a #1 seed in the NFC Playoffs because they have a harder schedule, despite the Bears having a better record. It just doesn't make any sense.</div>That's simply not true. Look at College Basketball. While it does follow record somewhat as far as seeding, you also have 5 loss teams with a better seed than 2 and 3 loss teams.IT'S MARCH MADNESS BAAAYBEEE!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jon_Vilma @ Nov 10 2006, 10:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 10 2006, 11:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moose87 @ Nov 10 2006, 09:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What about a one-loss SEC team?? That confrence is brutal</div>It is a brutal conference, but they still lost a game. No other sport in America gives a team a better seed when having a worse record. This would be like Giving the Giants a #1 seed in the NFC Playoffs because they have a harder schedule, despite the Bears having a better record. It just doesn't make any sense.</div>That's simply not true. Look at College Basketball. While it does follow record somewhat as far as seeding, you also have 5 loss teams with a better seed than 2 and 3 loss teams.IT'S MARCH MADNESS BAAAYBEEE!</div>I should have specified Professional Sport. :whistling:
[quote name='AdropOFvenom' post='74783' date='Nov 10 2006, 12:08 PM'][quote name='Jon_Vilma' post='74779' date='Nov 10 2006, 10:34 AM'][quote name='AdropOFvenom' post='74774' date='Nov 10 2006, 11:13 AM'][quote name='Moose87' post='74771' date='Nov 10 2006, 09:37 AM']What about a one-loss SEC team?? That confrence is brutal[/quote]It is a brutal conference, but they still lost a game. No other sport in America gives a team a better seed when having a worse record. This would be like Giving the Giants a #1 seed in the NFC Playoffs because they have a harder schedule, despite the Bears having a better record. It just doesn't make any sense.[/quote]That's simply not true. Look at College Basketball. While it does follow record somewhat as far as seeding, you also have 5 loss teams with a better seed than 2 and 3 loss teams.IT'S MARCH MADNESS BAAAYBEEE![/quote]I should have specified Professional Sport. :whistling:[/quote]Because College Football is a Professional Sport? :thumbsup:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 10 2006, 09:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If Rutgers does go undefeated in a major conference (Big East), then yes. I just dont see how you can give a spot in the National Championship game to a 1-loss team over a team that went Undefeated in a Major Conference, especially when they would have proved themselves in the Process with wins over both West Virginia and Louisville. I could understand giving Boise State the snub when they are playing in the WAC, but to a Big East team? Cmon.</div>Basically, it goes back to the whole thing about how the Big East is weak and it's hard to justify moving Rutgers up far enough to be national title contenders with the teams they have played.I don't think this will be an issue, though, as I believe WVU will beat Rutgers anyway. Then we'll have a genuine Big East clusterfuck for the top spot :thumbsup:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeefunk @ Nov 10 2006, 11:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 10 2006, 09:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If Rutgers does go undefeated in a major conference (Big East), then yes. I just dont see how you can give a spot in the National Championship game to a 1-loss team over a team that went Undefeated in a Major Conference, especially when they would have proved themselves in the Process with wins over both West Virginia and Louisville. I could understand giving Boise State the snub when they are playing in the WAC, but to a Big East team? Cmon.</div>Basically, it goes back to the whole thing about how the Big East is weak and it's hard to justify moving Rutgers up far enough to be national title contenders with the teams they have played.I don't think this will be an issue, though, as I believe WVU will beat Rutgers anyway. Then we'll have a genuine Big East clusterfuck for the top spot :thumbsup:</div>I know it's hard to say a team shouldn't be in the NC despite winning all their games, but if yall remember in the mid 90's Hawaii went undefeated and complained about not being in the NC, but then got crushed in their Bowl game by the only legit team they played all year.It all comes down to what you'd like to see. David vs Goliath or The Clash of the Titans.
Id love to see CAL in the big game, but, a whole lotta things would have to go right, starting with Cal beating USC, Texas losing, Florida losing, and and Notre Dame losing(to is a big possibility, in LA)im not gonna lie, i almost want to play Tennessee in a bowl game this year, because i want the rematch, weve gotten 1000 times better since that first game, and id just like to see each team play at the end of the year at their best...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Nov 10 2006, 12:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moose87 @ Nov 10 2006, 09:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What about a one-loss SEC team?? That confrence is brutal</div>It is a brutal conference, but they still lost a game. No other sport in America gives a team a better seed when having a worse record.This would be like Giving the Giants a #1 seed in the NFC Playoffs because they have a harder schedule, despite the Bears having a better record. It just doesn't make any sense.</div>REALLY!!?? Then how come in last year's NBA playoffs, the Mavericks were the 4 seed, despite having the 2nd best record in the West, the Nuggets were 3 despite having the 8th best record, the Grizzlies 5th despite the 4th best, the Clippers 6th despite the 5th best, the Lakers were 7th despite the 6th best, and the Kings 8th despite the 7th best??And how about baseball, where an 83-win team makes the playoffs (Cardinals), yet an 85-win team (Phillies) goes home?? :nuttkick: :flipa:
