Should USC be Ranked Over Michigan?

Question

Why should a one loss team who received their loss to a non-ranked nobody like Oregon State be ranked ahead of a one loss team who recieved their only loss to the #1 ranked team in the country. I don't want to argue rematch implications at all, just good common ranking sense. Why should Michigan drop below USC in the polls when the only loss they suffered was in, arguably, the best game in recent years & was decided by only 3 points to a team that nobody, obviously nobody is disputing to be ranked # 1. Any comments anybody?

Answer 1

there are way too many people who think that rankings are simply based on who a team loses to.

the rankings are based on a complex system that includes at least:

1. win-loss record
2. how a team wins or loses their games (points & home/road)
3. who a team plays (strength of schedule)
4. is a team getting better, staying the same, or getting worse?

in order to be in the BCS championship game, a team must:

1. finish #1 or #2 in the BCS rankings
2. win their conference

taking into consideration all of the factors that determine a team's ranking, USC should be ahead of michigan because:

1. michigan did not win their conference, ohio state did
2. USC's schedule is slightly stronger than michigan's
3. USC's loss was on the road; and they almost came back
4. USC shut down oregon, cal and notre dame


some extra points:

1. michigan is a really good team. if they played ohio state at home, they would have creamed the buckeyes. but they didn't. that's just how the schedule worked this year.

2. oregon state isn't all that bad of a football team. they are bowl-eligible with an 8-4 record. and if you look at the current AP & coaches polls, you will see that oregon state received some votes.

3. i believed that michigan was the #2 team last week (even after losing to #1 osu; and after USC beat cal). but USC is playing better and better and definitely deserve a high ranking.

4. if michigan plays ohio state in a rematch, that wouldn't be fair to ohio state because the buckeyes already beat michigan. if they played again and lost to michigan, why should michigan be crowned the national champion? they didn't win their conference and they already lost to ohio state.


so there you have it. a very UNBIASED opinion.

Answer 2

Yes USC's loss was to a team who is not ranked but look at the schedule they played versus who Michigan played. USC played Arkansas in Arkansas, Notre Dame (who Michigan also played), Nebraska as well as the Pac 10 conference who was overall better this year than the Big 10. Yes Ohio State and Michigan were great but the other 8 teams with the exception of Wisconsin had a very down year.

Answer 3

It just depends on personal opinion. Why is Ohio State ranked No.1? If your answer is that they are undefeated then fine. It's your opinion. Michigan has played what amounts to a three game schedule, OSU, Wisconsin and Notre Dame. They were 2-1 and managed to lose to the best one on their schedule. Non conference games against Ball State, Central Michigan, Vanderbilt and Notre Dame are hardly worthy of #2 ranking. With half the conference .500 or below and teams like Penn State and Iowa both having difficulty beating the weaker teams the schedule is not as imposing as some would like to say (when will people start judging these programs on what they do now and not what they did in the 60's/70's). And "the Best Game Of All Time" takes place every year (See USC vs Notre Dame and Texas just last year). Remember, it's not who you lose to but when you lose to them. On any given day Michigan could beat OSU. They day however has not taken place in 4 to 5 years....in basketball either! They had their "National Title Game" two weeks ago. And not even the passing of BO could motivate them to get it done.

Answer 4

It's a tough call, I think people just don't want to see a rematch. Really, what this is all about is people think USC is the only team besides Michigan that might be able to beat Ohio State.

I say rank Michigan #2 but let USC play Ohio State. That way it's fair, USC gets their shot and so does Michigan.

Hey, we've had split National Champions before, right.

But Ohio State can end all this by winning.

Answer 5

Just a point for all to consider -- The reason Michigan currently is #3 has to do with scheduling Vanderbilt, Central Michigan, and Ball State.

Don't start with the "Our conference is tough" arguments. There is not a team in the country that can control how tough any conference is.

Scheduling easy opponents might look good in the W/L record, but it will kill you every time in the strength of schedule department.

Answer 6

YES they should be ahead of Michigan. If you don't like it and want to see Michigan NOT fall then yell at the Big Ten that they didn't have the teams start the season later or end it later. Anytime you aren't playing it is hard to keep the human polls in your favor. Now to the point though. USC played a harder schedule.

Answer 7

Yes and i think u are absolutely right, USC did loose to the beavers and Michigan lost to Ohio state. The other one loss teams dont deserve a title shot agaisnt Ohio state cus they lost to other teams that arent 1 or 2 in the nation. Well if it was for me to decide id have Michigan play again agaisnt Ohio state but its not its up to some dumb comuters

Answer 8

I agree.....the BCS is Bull Crap System. Unless you are a Big Ten fan like me, most don't want a UM/OSU rematch. The whole process of the BCS is just moronic. Michigan has been the #2 team for 8 weeks, loses to #1, so that still makes them the #2 team in the country. Period.

Death to the BCS.

Answer 9

you ought to remember that USC became without their beginning QB for that Washington pastime, and their backup had between the worst performances via a QB in the history of the pete carroll era. electorate are plenty extra in all probability to forgive a loss like that than they may be if Barkley had that style of depressing pastime. you besides mght ought to word that LSU would not somewhat have a win that they actually appeared good - the place they actually appeared on correct of their pastime. they have elite expertise yet they have performed right down to the point of their opposition in each and every pastime. USC can dangle their hat on a 30-3 win over a set that became ranked on the time, besides as an in depth street win over between the elite communities in the rustic. LSU would not have any video games like that. hear, I understand that LSU followers have had it out for USC ever because of the fact the AP voted USC #a million after the 2003 season, and the opposite is real besides. yet in the tip, there are good the rationalization why USC is at present extra staggering to electorate than LSU. That mentioned, LSU has much extra administration over their championship opportunities than USC does. If LSU beats Alabama in Tuscaloosa on Nov. 7, they are going to leapfrog USC (and doubtless some different communities). Then, in the event that they win the rematch with Florida in the SEC championship pastime, there is not any longer a voter alive who might shop the Tigers out of the BCS identify pastime. it rather isn't any longer real of USC, who could desire to win out and nonetheless no longer earn a identify pastime berth. And if LSU would not beat Alabama, then they're going to have 2 losses, and one in all 2 issues would be real. the two USC won't have lost lower back, wherein case there'll be no argument that LSU ought to be bigger than USC... or USC could have lost lower back, wherein case no one in the worldwide outdoors of LSU and USC followers will care with reference to the relative positioning of two 2-loss communities.

Answer 10

simply put that's the bcs for you they don't make any sense what so ever the whole bcs needs to be dumped in the garbage where it belongs i say get rid of the bcs and put in some kind of playoff system or a tournament something like march madness has