is there anyone out there who can offer some REAL analysis about whether or not the current rankings are what they should be or not?
there are way too many michigan & florida fans claiming that the rankings are BS, but none of them have come up with any STRONG arguments on why the rankings should not be what they are.
doesn't everyone know that the BCS rankings are determined more than just who a team loses to?
who thinks that MOST (not all) michigan fans and florida fans are a bunch of crybabies who can't offer up any REAL ANALYSIS? you are all just jealous because your team is not #2.
i'm sick of hearing:
1. USC lost to unranked oregon state
2. florida plays a "tougher" schedule
3. michigan would have beaten ohio state if they played in michigan
look everyone, it is what it is...
2006-11-27 08:46:48 · 11 answers · asked by loveholio 5 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
some fairly good ANALYSIS so far. that's what i wanted...analyses, not crybaby remarks.
theonlybeldin seems to have provided the most insightful analysis thus far. i didn't even think of that!
2006-11-27 10:20:59 · update #1
We need a playoff system, for certain, but the rankings are as they should be. It's not a one-game season, like all of the Michigan and Florida fans want to say; it's a 12-game season, and each game matters.
All of the Michigan fans want everyone to forget that they almost lost to Ball State, or looked very unimpressive in wins over Minnesota and Northwestern, two very bad teams. The Florida fans want you to forget unimpressive wins over South Carolina or Florida State, or even that they stooped so low to play a bad I-AA team in Western Carolina.
They neglect to mention that USC only played two teams with losing records this season (Washington and Stanford) or that their three non-conference opponents all still have a chance to get into a BCS bowl game, all the while only playing 6 home games. Michigan faced 5 teams who ended up with losing records and 7 home games. Florida played 7 home games and one neutral site game while facing 3 teams with losing records.
Florida, in my opinion, has much reason to gripe than Michigan does. The Gators will have faced 4 teams currently in the Top 25 while Michigan will only have played 3, and the Gators are in a much tougher conference, where their schedule had them avoiding both Mississippi schools and Arkansas (who of course they will play Saturday).
Bottom line: USC deserves to be #2 and should they beat UCLA, play for the national title in the screwed-up system we have.
And, sorry, but Ahern's comparison is total BS. You can't evaluate Michigan and USC based solely on how both did against Notre Dame. The only line is his argument that is valid, and the one that runs counter-intuitive to his argument, is that USC will play 10 bowl teams (including oh-so-woeful, yet somehow 8-4, Oregon State) while Michigan only played 7.
2006-11-27 10:08:38 · answer #1 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The rankings are what they should be, it is very clear. The fact that Ohio State beat every team to come its way gives them the automatic #1, but you knew that already. The real issue is USC at #2, but you have to agree with it. The computers, although not real people have done exactly the same thing as those voting in the polls, and given credit to USC for beating Notre Dame, however overrated you believe them to be, and beating a top 10 team in Arkansas earlier in the season, however different you think the team is now than it was then. USC and Ohio State deserve to be where they are now, and if USC can hold on against UCLA, they should go straight to Glendale to play for the National Championship without anyone fussing about it. I think the BCS has done a great job, and people should stop criticizing the computers if the humans and the computers both chose the same top six teams this week, look it up.
www.bcsknowhow.com
2006-11-27 08:53:48 · answer #2 · answered by asherfeldman 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The current BCS system is flawed because even though it tries to project an objective image, at some level "polls" always include subjectivity. This is why there is controversy every year.
That being said, the only controversy when the smoke clears will be over who is number 2, and who really cares about #2?
Should USC beat Ohio State, they will be Number 1 no question. If Ohio State wins, Ohio State will be 1 and USC and Michigan can quibble over 2 but I doubt they will. Michigan had their chance to show they were the best team in the country. They lost, so hush up Michigan and get ready for next year.
As for Florida, who are you kidding?
2006-11-27 09:21:58 · answer #3 · answered by True Blue 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I am also tired of hearing all these stupid fans with all their opinions, but no real analysis to support their claims.
It has been a CRAZY season so far, filled with a lot more controversy than I can remember.
First of all, there's nothing that any football fan can do about the rankings, so yes, there are a lot of crybabies out there.
Fans don't need to give analysis because all that is done by the voters in the AP, USA Today and Harris polls.
Flawed or not, I agree. It is what it is for now...
2006-11-27 09:34:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Florida should not even be in the discussion here. It is only between MIchigan and USC. The only reason that USC in ahead in the polls is because USC lost earlier in the season. Yes, MIchigan lost a game, so did USC. The reason people are bringing up who the losses were to is completely valid. MIchigan lost to the #1 team in the nation, in the Shoe. No one wants to play at the Shoe, and they lost by 3 points. USC lost to Oregon State by 2 points. They only played one common team and that is Notre Dame. They both won. USC at home (and what team wants to play at the Coliseum?), and Michigan delivered the worst beating that Notre Dame had recieved at home in a really long time. Michigan beat a #2 Notre Dame on the road and was the underdog. USC beat a #6 Notre Dame at home and was favored to win the game. USC won by an impressive 20 points, 44-24, but MIchigan topped that as they won by 26 points 47-21. I think that Michigan is the more impressive team this year and just because they lost late in the season and USC got to play 2 games after Michigan finished their season, they jump in the polls. That's a load of crap. Now, here is a sports writer's take on this subject:
THE POINT AFTER
Gary Ahern
There is no denying that Southern California’s 44-24 win over Notre Dame on Saturday night was dominating.
But as the Bowl Championship Series computers whirred and spit out the Trojans as the new No. 2 team in the land Sunday night, it dawned on me – we now have an apples-to-apples comparison of USC and No. 3 Michigan – the teams’ performances against the Fighting Irish, their lone common opponent.
As the debate over who should face No. 1 Ohio State in the BCS title game on Jan. 8 supposedly comes to “style points,” what we have here is some substance.
A simple study of the boxscores shows the Wolverines were even more demonstrative in dismantling Notre Dame, and by a fairly significant margin.
Michigan had the edge over USC against Notre Dame in the following categories:
Points for: 47-44 (3).
Points against: 21-24 (3).
Total yards allowed: 273-404 (131).
Rushing yards allowed: 32-130 (98).
Passing yards allowed: 241-274 (33).
Turnovers forced: 5-1 (4).
Rushing yards: 148-139 (9)
USC, meanwhile held slight edges in just two categories:
Net offensive yards: 404-368 (36).
Passing yards: 265-220 (45).
The evidence seems pretty empirical, especially when you factor in that the Wolverines’ lone loss came by three points at top-ranked Ohio State (12-0), while the Trojans lost at unranked Oregon State (8-4) by two.
Strength of schedule? USC faced 10 teams that will play in bowls, Michigan seven.
As you do the math, it seems clear that the Maize and Blue should be making their way to the desert for a date with the Buckeyes, not the Cardinal and Gold.
2006-11-27 10:02:08 · answer #5 · answered by boomer72 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the BCS has to go...they need to start a playoff or something to avoid any of the arguing though. Just because USC lost to an unranked team they had more games to save their season and get their ranking back up along with getting confidence back. With michigan losing their last game then their confidence has really went down (especially losing to their rivals). They didnt have any more games to get their confidence back. Most of the ranking has to do with the timing of your loss.
2006-11-27 08:56:32 · answer #6 · answered by imsmartkid 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"And, sorry, but Ahern's comparison is total BS. You can't evaluate Michigan and USC based solely on how both did against Notre Dame. The only line is his argument that is valid, and the one that runs counter-intuitive to his argument, is that USC will play 10 bowl teams (including oh-so-woeful, yet somehow 8-4, Oregon State) while Michigan only played 7. "
Word!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That Ahern dude was talking like a fan. A michigan fan. Ain't no sports writer in their right mind is gonna judge Michigan and USC by their one game against Notre Dame. I mean WTF??!?! Illinois played Ohio State to a 17-10. Michigan played Ohio State to a 42-39. Can you say that Illinois is better than Michigan?!?!?
What a garbage sports writer that dude is. It's shameful.
2006-11-27 10:27:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The BCS is the biggest load of crap that college football has ever seen!!!!! Until there is a playoff, there will only be mythical champion each year!!! Prime example is 2004 when an undefeated SEC team, Auburn, doesn't even get a shot to play for the title!!!! I mean give me a break!!! Mythical Champions is what the BCS crowns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a load of crap!!!!
2006-11-27 09:30:19 · answer #8 · answered by On Time 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nobody would dare say the NCAA basketball tournament doesn't produce a true champion, yet at the same time nobody is bothered by a politicized "ranking" system which proves nothing.
No playoff = no legitimate champion. End of discussion.
.
2006-11-27 08:57:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very funny. 10/10 and a star.
2016-05-23 14:42:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋