This Week in College Football 11/14 - 11/18

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

I swear to Christ, you guys don't know how to read.

 

The link (for the third time): http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc06.htm

 

From the web site:

The SCHEDULE ratings represent the average schedule difficulty faced

by each team in the games that it's played so far. The schedule

difficulty of a given game takes into account the rating of the

opponent and the location of the game.

 

Conference Rankings

There are two group ratings, the "central mean" and the

"simple average" (also known as the "arithmetic mean")

The "central mean" gives the most weight to the middle team(s)

in the group and progressively less weight to teams as you go

away from the middle in either direction, up or down.

 

This tends to smooth out the effect of anomalous teams that are rated

much higher and lower than the middle team(s) in the group. The

"simple average" ("arithmetic mean") weights each team equally

no matter where they are relative to the middle.

 

Here are a few examples of how the "central mean" is computed.

4-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-2-1

5-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-2-1

6-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-3-2-1

7-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-3-2-1

8-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-4-3-2-1

9-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1

10-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-5-4-3-2-1

11-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-6-5-4-3-2-1

12-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-6-6-5-4-3-2-1

13-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-6-5-4-3-2-1

[cabbageboy 0]

What people need to realize is that the SEC and Big 10 have some flat out JOBBERS. I mean the SEC has Vandy, Ole Miss, Miss St. as total scrubs. Bama and UGA are both way down. SC is their usual middling selves. Honestly I think the SEC only really deserves 1 BCS bid, and that is whoever wins between Florida and Arkansas. Everyone else is like a 10-2 Cotton Bowl or Peach Bowl team to me.

 

The Big 10 has 3 really solid teams and maybe 2 others that are decent enough (Penn St., Purdue). But Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, MSU weigh it down.

 

Here is one thing I want SEC lovers to explain: If fucking UK has a shot of finishing 2nd in the east, how good can the SEC really be?

 

The Pac 10 only has USC as a serious BCS contender, but there is a good amount of balance. As in aside from Stanford there really aren't too many awful teams.

 

If anyone wonders why the Big East is highly rated in that rating, it's because there really aren't too many total losers aside from UConn and Syracuse. U of L, WVU, Rutgers, USF, Cincy, and Pitt are all bowl eligible.

[lomasmoney 0]

I've had enough of this shit. Outside of the Ball State and Northwestern Games(keep in mind, that the Northwestern game was in shitty weather and it was the biggest 17-3 blowout I have seen in a while, and Ball State was a glorified scrimmage with some our our three deep players seeing time on both sides of the ball), Michigan has destroyed everyone they played outside of Ohio State. I've been to or watched every game they played, and I know more about football than most people here. SC on the other hand, gets credit for the Nebraska and Arkansas OOC game. Arkansas was missing a Heisman candidate, and really didn't have anything resembling a quarterback. Yes, SC whupped them bad, but take away a player of that caliber from any team and see what happens considering Arkansas isn't Texas,Florida, or USC when it comes to depth. the Nebraska game was a joke, and showed moreso how bad of a coach Bill Callahan is more so than how good SC was. Nebraska came out in Three-TE sets. It was like they were playing to cover the spread or something and not to win. The Pac-10 isn't that good. Their second and arguably third best teams got beat by an Arizona team that will go to some crappy bowl in Helena,Montana somewhere. the third best team in the Big Ten hasn't lost to anyone other than Michigan. I don't care about the hot dick they scheduled in the out of conference, any time you can get through the Big 10 with one loss its pretty much concludes to me you have a good team. Now don't get me wrong, the Trojans are legitamately the third or fourth best team in the nation, but I have to put Michigan ahead of them just because Michigan has been a more dominant team. I think it would suck if USC jumped Michigan because they beat a team that Michigan blew out. If Michigan and Ohio State are the two best teams, which I feel that they are, let them play. Who cares if it already happened. The BCS matches the top two teams, not the two best teams who havent already played yet

[Guest Princess Leena]

Helena isn't deserving of your hate.

 

Hey, iggy, why don't you give us an update of all the Montana schools.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Let me get this straight, I make countless posts full of reasoned arguments and actual evidence, but that doesn't mean anything because you've seen every Michigan game and you know football better than everyone else. Okay thanks. I'll remember not to pay any attention to what you say. What will you say if USC beats Notre Dame by a greater margin of victory than Michigan did?

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

I guess it's my fault for thinking a Michigan fan could engage in any reasoned debate beyond: The Big 10 is better than the Pac-10 because the Big 10 is the Big 10 and the Pac-10 is the Pac-10.

[Guest Princess Leena]

Hey, OSU beat USC. Boise KILLED OSU. Just saying.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Buckeyes vs. Broncos, baby!

[lomasmoney 0]

I don't see that happening. If they do, then they probably will jump to two and both polls and play for the national title. I don't have any problem with it. My main argument has been that people are already saying that USC is more deserving of playing for the national title than Michigan. My gripe has been with people saying that Michigan doesn't deserve a rematch but yet saying they are the second best team. The system matches the two best teams, and I personally feel that Michigan is better. I think its shitty for fans of whatever schools are left out, because a four team playoff could solve this whole fucking thing. Why don't they just do 1v 4 and 2v3 and then do the plus one game the week after. That would solve everything, well almost everything. We wouldnt have to sit here and wave our dicks about what team is better, it would be settled on the field.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Personally, I have always said USC was deserving IF they won out.

 

I couldn't agree more about a playoff, though.

[iggymcfly 0]

Helena isn't deserving of your hate.

 

Hey, iggy, why don't you give us an update of all the Montana schools.

 

Sure. The Griz beat the Bobcats on Saturday to guarantee three home games in the playoffs. I watched the last three minutes while OSU/Michigan was at halftime, when they got a late stop to win the game.

 

Basically, even though they've won 11 in a row and are ranked #2, everyone keeps complaining that they're not very good this year because they've had a couple close games and the offense looks bad. Josh Swogger was very good his first two years at Washington State including during the 10-2 Holiday Bowl season, but he's gone so far downhill now that he routinely one-hops 5 yard out routes, gets booed loudly at home, and got benched for a while two weeks ago before the backup got hurt. I think the backup might be healthy now, but Swogger's still getting most of the snaps.

 

I'm really not too into the team now though. After spending two and a half years at a I-A school, it's hard to get pumped up about I-AA football. I'm also sick of living in Montana right now, and don't really feel a lot of civic pride or anything. The only real connection I have to the team is that I'm friends with one of the starting tackles who plays poker all the time.

[Guest]

Personally, I have always said USC was deserving IF they won out.

 

I couldn't agree more about a playoff, though.

I didn't think that they would beat Cal, so I didn't see any argument coming about them being in the title game.

 

Wisconsin played nobody, and Arkansas played 2 other good teams. Let's throw that shit out there right now. Both played junk, and I don't like basing arguments on teams second best wins. I like the overall picture much better, and it points to SC. The teams that Michigan played when those teams were good clearly did not hold up. Especially Iowa.

 

If USC wins out, they have played the better schedule. That's what I care about when comparing teams with an equal win-loss record. That's really the ONLY thing that should push an argument one way or another. USC played close games because the teams that they played were good. Let's not fault them for that.

 

On a totally unrelated note, I'm SO SICK of seeing people shit on the Pac 10 because they don't have a chance to watch the games. That's what it is, and it's annoying as fuck. I'm glad the conference will be on "The Worldwide Shitter" next year.

[cabbageboy 0]

You know, none of this ranting about USC and Michigan would be necessary if U of L had simply taken care of Rutgers. For that I apologize on behalf of the Cardinals.

 

Anyway I think Jim Tressel had it right. If you don't win your conference, you have no business talking national title. Michigan lost by 3, but it was kind of like the Eagles losing to the Patriots by 3. As in watching the game they just sorta were in it but had no real shot in hell of winning. For instance if they don't tack on that late TD and 2 pt. conversion Ohio St. wins it by 11 and nobody would demand a rematch.

 

It'll be interesting to see how it shapes up if Michigan stays #2 in a poll while USC takes #2 in the BCS. If USC wins vs. OSU and Michigan wins the Rose Bowl....could it be a split title?

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

You know, none of this ranting about USC and Michigan would be necessary if U of L had simply taken care of Rutgers. For that I apologize on behalf of the Cardinals.

 

Anyway I think Jim Tressel had it right. If you don't win your conference, you have no business talking national title. Michigan lost by 3, but it was kind of like the Eagles losing to the Patriots by 3. As in watching the game they just sorta were in it but had no real shot in hell of winning. For instance if they don't tack on that late TD and 2 pt. conversion Ohio St. wins it by 11 and nobody would demand a rematch.

 

It'll be interesting to see how it shapes up if Michigan stays #2 in a poll while USC takes #2 in the BCS. If USC wins vs. OSU and Michigan wins the Rose Bowl....could it be a split title?

 

Very unlikely because beating OSU would be easily the best win anyone has produced all year. But it doesn't matter because Michigan is the only team that won't lose to OSU by double digits in the BCS title game. I bet when the line comes out for that game, it's OSU by 3.5 if the opponent is Michigan and 10.5 if it's anyone else.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Go back and read the responses to the game in this thread. Ohio State looked poised to blow Michigan out of the stadium and the Wolverines were playing catch-up all game long. Outside of the opening drive where Ohio State's offense had yet to take the field, there was nothing to indicate that Michigan was better. They've already played, Michigan lost. Go to the Rose Bowl and be happy with a $4 million payout or however much it is the teams get for making it there. Using the Florida/Florida State example isn't valid since there was no dedicated system to determine a national champion at the time, only polls. Speaking of the polls, both that are factored into the BCS have USC as #2, and the computer average is what pushes Michigan up into that slot. One year people bitch about the computers, the next they embrace them. I understand that there are fans and all, but make up your damn minds.

ok but Michigan lost by 3 to the number 1 team...according to your astute logic...USC had their chance against Oregon State who I doubt is even a top 60 team and lost...and according to your intelligent fact checking...USC played catch up all game to Oregon State and was down a bigger margin than Michigan ever was to OSU...determining the number 2 team this year...you have to weigh...should you vote for the team you WANT to see in the title game...or the team that DESERVES to be in the title game?...if there are more people like you out there (please God no) then I guess we are going to see the 'sexy' matchup and the possibility of a split national title ensues particularly if Notre Dame is in the title game....enjoy

Christ, you ARE the Michigan Dama.

 

Did Michigan have a chance to win at the very end of the game and fail on a two point conversion? NO. They got their decks checked in the second quarter and were fortunate enough to get a couple of takeaways to keep it close. At no point in the game did they appear to be a better team, and never lead after the first quarter. Michigan would deserve to be in the title game if they won on Saturday. They didn't. Enjoy the Rose Bowl against West Virginia and try not to be embarassed like Georgia was when they underestimated them last year. Besides, it's become rather obvious that Lloyd Carr can't beat Jim Tressel, so why try again? Just pull your Boomer Sooner, I mean, Big Blue fingers out of your ears and understand that assertions that a team that just lost their final game does not imply that they don't even deserve a cable hookup to watch other teams play in bowls. It means they can't play for the title. It's football, and if they were better, they would have won, period.

 

wow...between this and your "Northwestern having a chance to beat Michigan" nonsense and "Clemson could be in the national title game" nonsense is making my head hurt...USC will not blow out Notre Dame...ND is the best team SC played this year..when it is a close ball game...just remember Michigan winning by 26 at South Bend alright?

Yeah, Northwestern had a chance to beat Michigan because they were playing them. In your deluded little (not big) blue world, that's interpreted as some prediction of Wildcat victory. And HOW long ago was it when I said Clemson could end up in the title game? Like, around the time they waxed Georgia Tech and hadn't done their usual Bowden swan dive?

 

Notre Dame is NOT the best team USC will play all year. That would be Ohio State on January 8th. Regular season-wise, USC's most impressive win would be against Cal in my mind, possibly Nebraska if they can win the Big XII. "OH YA CAL WHO LOST TO ARIZONA THEY SUCK BALLZ" Yeah, the same Arizona that's won four straight.

 

Close ball game my ass, Notre Dame's best chance at beating USC was a year ago. Michigan destroyed them for a reason, because beating up on military academies, a team whose coach was axed before the end of the season (oh wait, two), a Pac-10 jobber that was lucky to win a game this season, and a couple of middling Big Ten teams makes a GREAT resume for a "BCS caliber" team. You said it yourself, Michigan beat their asses, at home, and you think that helps their image against USC on the road?

 

And who would REALLY give a flying fuck about a rematch beyond national title interest? Not only is there no competitive reason for one, but there's no want for one. Does anyone else remember the period a year ago where Miami and Florida State played like, three times in one calendar year? It got worse each time and produced uglier and uglier games. I'd wager it did a great deal to fuck with their respective images since you saw one or the other lose three times within a short period.

[lomasmoney 0]

It is somewhat terrifying that I have to root for the Notre Dame secondary, yes the same secondary that Mario Mannignham torched so bad they weren't even in the picture on some of his catches, to stop two All-American recievers plus the other ridiculously talented wideouts SC has. I am moreso frustrated knowing that Michigan's title hopes are resting on a team who hasn't beaten one ranked team all season. How is Notre Dame even ranked in the top 5. If they were ranked like 14th, USC stomping them wouldn't be anywhere as impressive and they might not jump Michigan, but I was looking at the matchups, and I don't see how the Irish can keep this one close. Forget the media love affair with Notre Dame, they aren't anywhere near a top 10 team, in terms of talent or merit. Yet USC will be gift wrapped a win over a "top 5" team , because ND has a slow defense, and Pete Carroll is smart, he's seen that Brady Quinn wilts when is pressured and doesn't have all day to throw. SC is gonna win by 3 touchdowns at least, and I hope that is all. It's going to suck knowing the even in the years where we beat ND, those overhyped fucks still will find a way to mess up Michigan's season

[dh86 0]

Go back and read the responses to the game in this thread. Ohio State looked poised to blow Michigan out of the stadium and the Wolverines were playing catch-up all game long. Outside of the opening drive where Ohio State's offense had yet to take the field, there was nothing to indicate that Michigan was better. They've already played, Michigan lost. Go to the Rose Bowl and be happy with a $4 million payout or however much it is the teams get for making it there. Using the Florida/Florida State example isn't valid since there was no dedicated system to determine a national champion at the time, only polls. Speaking of the polls, both that are factored into the BCS have USC as #2, and the computer average is what pushes Michigan up into that slot. One year people bitch about the computers, the next they embrace them. I understand that there are fans and all, but make up your damn minds.

ok but Michigan lost by 3 to the number 1 team...according to your astute logic...USC had their chance against Oregon State who I doubt is even a top 60 team and lost...and according to your intelligent fact checking...USC played catch up all game to Oregon State and was down a bigger margin than Michigan ever was to OSU...determining the number 2 team this year...you have to weigh...should you vote for the team you WANT to see in the title game...or the team that DESERVES to be in the title game?...if there are more people like you out there (please God no) then I guess we are going to see the 'sexy' matchup and the possibility of a split national title ensues particularly if Notre Dame is in the title game....enjoy

Christ, you ARE the Michigan Dama.

 

Did Michigan have a chance to win at the very end of the game and fail on a two point conversion? NO. They got their decks checked in the second quarter and were fortunate enough to get a couple of takeaways to keep it close. At no point in the game did they appear to be a better team, and never lead after the first quarter. Michigan would deserve to be in the title game if they won on Saturday. They didn't. Enjoy the Rose Bowl against West Virginia and try not to be embarassed like Georgia was when they underestimated them last year. Besides, it's become rather obvious that Lloyd Carr can't beat Jim Tressel, so why try again? Just pull your Boomer Sooner, I mean, Big Blue fingers out of your ears and understand that assertions that a team that just lost their final game does not imply that they don't even deserve a cable hookup to watch other teams play in bowls. It means they can't play for the title. It's football, and if they were better, they would have won, period.

 

wow...between this and your "Northwestern having a chance to beat Michigan" nonsense and "Clemson could be in the national title game" nonsense is making my head hurt...USC will not blow out Notre Dame...ND is the best team SC played this year..when it is a close ball game...just remember Michigan winning by 26 at South Bend alright?

Yeah, Northwestern had a chance to beat Michigan because they were playing them. In your deluded little (not big) blue world, that's interpreted as some prediction of Wildcat victory. And HOW long ago was it when I said Clemson could end up in the title game? Like, around the time they waxed Georgia Tech and hadn't done their usual Bowden swan dive?

 

Notre Dame is NOT the best team USC will play all year. That would be Ohio State on January 8th. Regular season-wise, USC's most impressive win would be against Cal in my mind, possibly Nebraska if they can win the Big XII. "OH YA CAL WHO LOST TO ARIZONA THEY SUCK BALLZ" Yeah, the same Arizona that's won four straight.

 

Close ball game my ass, Notre Dame's best chance at beating USC was a year ago. Michigan destroyed them for a reason, because beating up on military academies, a team whose coach was axed before the end of the season (oh wait, two), a Pac-10 jobber that was lucky to win a game this season, and a couple of middling Big Ten teams makes a GREAT resume for a "BCS caliber" team. You said it yourself, Michigan beat their asses, at home, and you think that helps their image against USC on the road?

 

And who would REALLY give a flying fuck about a rematch beyond national title interest? Not only is there no competitive reason for one, but there's no want for one. Does anyone else remember the period a year ago where Miami and Florida State played like, three times in one calendar year? It got worse each time and produced uglier and uglier games. I'd wager it did a great deal to fuck with their respective images since you saw one or the other lose three times within a short period.

where to start...where to start...ah fuck i'll go backwards....who cares who gives a flying fuck about a rematch?...I know if I wasnt a Michigan fan I would not be too into watching a rematch either BUT...the best teams are the best teams...rest of the paragraph is irrelevant I see...last years ND-USC game...also irrelevant...you happily left out ND beating the top team in the ACC I see....USC hasnt had a game scheduled against OSU yet so thats also irrelevant....arizona winning 4 straight thats also....well you see the pattern here...no northwestern did not have a chance against michigan...and if bowden has an annual swan dive...why even bring it up? lol......the Michigan hate is getting to you...I think you need a hug

[dh86 0]

Go back and read the responses to the game in this thread. Ohio State looked poised to blow Michigan out of the stadium and the Wolverines were playing catch-up all game long. Outside of the opening drive where Ohio State's offense had yet to take the field, there was nothing to indicate that Michigan was better. They've already played, Michigan lost. Go to the Rose Bowl and be happy with a $4 million payout or however much it is the teams get for making it there. Using the Florida/Florida State example isn't valid since there was no dedicated system to determine a national champion at the time, only polls. Speaking of the polls, both that are factored into the BCS have USC as #2, and the computer average is what pushes Michigan up into that slot. One year people bitch about the computers, the next they embrace them. I understand that there are fans and all, but make up your damn minds.

ok but Michigan lost by 3 to the number 1 team...according to your astute logic...USC had their chance against Oregon State who I doubt is even a top 60 team and lost...and according to your intelligent fact checking...USC played catch up all game to Oregon State and was down a bigger margin than Michigan ever was to OSU...determining the number 2 team this year...you have to weigh...should you vote for the team you WANT to see in the title game...or the team that DESERVES to be in the title game?...if there are more people like you out there (please God no) then I guess we are going to see the 'sexy' matchup and the possibility of a split national title ensues particularly if Notre Dame is in the title game....enjoy

Christ, you ARE the Michigan Dama.

 

Did Michigan have a chance to win at the very end of the game and fail on a two point conversion? NO. They got their decks checked in the second quarter and were fortunate enough to get a couple of takeaways to keep it close. At no point in the game did they appear to be a better team, and never lead after the first quarter. Michigan would deserve to be in the title game if they won on Saturday. They didn't. Enjoy the Rose Bowl against West Virginia and try not to be embarassed like Georgia was when they underestimated them last year. Besides, it's become rather obvious that Lloyd Carr can't beat Jim Tressel, so why try again? Just pull your Boomer Sooner, I mean, Big Blue fingers out of your ears and understand that assertions that a team that just lost their final game does not imply that they don't even deserve a cable hookup to watch other teams play in bowls. It means they can't play for the title. It's football, and if they were better, they would have won, period.

 

wow...between this and your "Northwestern having a chance to beat Michigan" nonsense and "Clemson could be in the national title game" nonsense is making my head hurt...USC will not blow out Notre Dame...ND is the best team SC played this year..when it is a close ball game...just remember Michigan winning by 26 at South Bend alright?

Yeah, Northwestern had a chance to beat Michigan because they were playing them. In your deluded little (not big) blue world, that's interpreted as some prediction of Wildcat victory. And HOW long ago was it when I said Clemson could end up in the title game? Like, around the time they waxed Georgia Tech and hadn't done their usual Bowden swan dive?

 

Notre Dame is NOT the best team USC will play all year. That would be Ohio State on January 8th. Regular season-wise, USC's most impressive win would be against Cal in my mind, possibly Nebraska if they can win the Big XII. "OH YA CAL WHO LOST TO ARIZONA THEY SUCK BALLZ" Yeah, the same Arizona that's won four straight.

 

Close ball game my ass, Notre Dame's best chance at beating USC was a year ago. Michigan destroyed them for a reason, because beating up on military academies, a team whose coach was axed before the end of the season (oh wait, two), a Pac-10 jobber that was lucky to win a game this season, and a couple of middling Big Ten teams makes a GREAT resume for a "BCS caliber" team. You said it yourself, Michigan beat their asses, at home, and you think that helps their image against USC on the road?

 

And who would REALLY give a flying fuck about a rematch beyond national title interest? Not only is there no competitive reason for one, but there's no want for one. Does anyone else remember the period a year ago where Miami and Florida State played like, three times in one calendar year? It got worse each time and produced uglier and uglier games. I'd wager it did a great deal to fuck with their respective images since you saw one or the other lose three times within a short period.

oh shit I forgot the first part lol.....but you tell me young lady....a 2 point loss to oregon state is now= to a 3 point loss to ohio state...and after all the words you have typed..you have failed to type one thing (that im sure you'll do after the fact)...you have yet to say that USC is a better team than Michigan

 

thanks

[CanadianChris 0]

Honestly, this is getting worse than the last two years.

[cabbageboy 0]

It might be worse because in the end it won't matter worth a damn, since Ohio St. will beat the piss out of either.

 

Honestly, you know who I think would have the best shot at Ohio St. and this might sound bizarre....West Virginia. They won't get it since U of L beat them (and everyone knows if you lose to U of L you have to suck, right?) and WVU might not win the Big East outright. Honestly, I don't think anyone can really stop White and Slaton. OSU might win but they would have to simply outscore WVU something like 45-42.

[Guest]

Honestly, you know who I think would have the best shot at Ohio St. and this might sound bizarre....West Virginia.

Them and Florida with Tim Tebow as the starter. The Buckeyes have a hard time containing mobile quarterbacks, but who doesn't?

[Vern Gagne 0]

Honestly, this is getting worse than the last two years.

 

What Damaramuesque posts?

[CanadianChris 0]

Honestly, this is getting worse than the last two years.

 

What Damaramuesque posts?

Yeah, that.

[dh86 0]

dama must have been one loved guy if he's being brought up everyday randomly

[lomasmoney 0]

I don't think Ohio State would beat the piss out of Florida, Michigan, or USC. They just played Michigan and that game wasn't exactly the epitome of a team beating the piss out of their opponent. I think whatever team gets into the title game will give Ohio State a close game

[Slayer 0]

Let's not fall into a trap of "everyone is playing for the right to lose to Ohio State", given the string of WTF champions we've had in all the major sports the last few years

[Art Sandusky 0]

where to start...where to start...ah fuck i'll go backwards....who cares who gives a flying fuck about a rematch?...I know if I wasnt a Michigan fan I would not be too into watching a rematch either BUT...the best teams are the best teams...rest of the paragraph is irrelevant I see...last years ND-USC game...also irrelevant...you happily left out ND beating the top team in the ACC I see....USC hasnt had a game scheduled against OSU yet so thats also irrelevant....arizona winning 4 straight thats also....well you see the pattern here...no northwestern did not have a chance against michigan...and if bowden has an annual swan dive...why even bring it up? lol......the Michigan hate is getting to you...I think you need a hug

Georgia Tech's the top team in the ACC before the conference has even been determined. Okay then. I think you need a fucking brain transplant, you goddamn illiterate homer.

 

oh shit I forgot the first part lol.....but you tell me young lady....a 2 point loss to oregon state is now= to a 3 point loss to ohio state...and after all the words you have typed..you have failed to type one thing (that im sure you'll do after the fact)...you have yet to say that USC is a better team than Michigan

 

thanks

I shouldn't have to say USC is a better team than Michigan because they are. How the fuck would it help any kind of argument to just throw out a "USC's better!" sentence? If they weren't, Michigan would have WON. Stop arguing on behalf of a loser and embarassing other Michigan fans here who can produce actual reasoned arguments.

 

You know how USC's loss was different from Michigan's? I'll tell you AGAIN:

 

USC was a failed two point conversion AS TIME EXPIRED from sending their game with Oregon State into overtime. Michigan was finished with two minutes left to play. That's the difference. Also, despite THREE takeaways, Michigan was still outgained by 106 yards, converted less than half of their third down opportunities, and had a disadvantage (three minutes, not so much of a big deal) in the time of possession. A GREAT team, the kind that it will take to beat Ohio State this year, a CHAMPIONSHIP caliber team, which is what the title game is about, would be able to actually make something happen out of those turnovers. Also, only four of their scoring drives started in their own territory. The other two started on Ohio State's 25 and 9 yard lines.

 

They lost, they're not going to the title game, get over it and stop trying to ruin what was a civil year of college talk here without Dama around. He's referenced because he was doing the same shit you are now except with Oklahoma instead.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Let's not fall into a trap of "everyone is playing for the right to lose to Ohio State", given the string of WTF champions we've had in all the major sports the last few years

 

True enough but it seems every year there has been a clear #1 in the BCS and the whole debate has been over who gets to play them, whichever team does get sent jobs and the team everyone knew was the best ends up that way (see 1998, 2000, 2001).

[Slayer 0]

Let's not fall into a trap of "everyone is playing for the right to lose to Ohio State", given the string of WTF champions we've had in all the major sports the last few years

 

True enough but it seems every year there has been a clear #1 in the BCS and the whole debate has been over who gets to play them, whichever team does get sent jobs and the team everyone knew was the best ends up that way (see 1998, 2000, 2001).

Okay, the last two I agree with, but 1998? Between Tennessee in '98 and OSU in '02, I dunno who was the luckiest national champion of the BCS-era.

[Art Sandusky 0]

LSU?