I’m not a Michigan fan, nor am I a huge OSU fanboy, even though I do like OSU’s team this year, but Michigan fans should be screaming louder for a playoff system then anyone else. They got stuck in a split National Championship nine years ago, and now once again, they could be on the outside looking in hoping for a “split” title.
Yes, Florida beat a decent Arkansas team 38-28 to win the SEC Championship. Yes, they finally showed signs of offense that they have not shown in quite a long time (unless they’re playing Western Carolina), but did they do enough strictly on the merits of their game to leapfrog Michigan? I don’t necessarily think so, and voting on the opinion that you didn’t want to see a rematch is a complete prosecution of what the BCS is supposed to be about, pitting the #1 and #2 teams against each other.
So thus, if Florida does beat OSU, and Michigan beats USC soundly, the chance for a split national title exists, the same split that happened just three years ago using the BCS system. If this was supposed to fix these problems, having a split every three years isn’t solving anything.
While I also understand some of the arguments about a playoff system and it taking more time, or taking some of the luster off of the regular season, I don’t necessarily see that as true. If you look back at this season, it would have made only the OSU-Michigan less significant. Every other game that I can think of, outside of LSU-Florida, had 2 teams in which you could argue at least one team would be out of a playoff if they lost, if it was an 8-team thing. The idea that it takes the athlete-student (let’s be honest here) away from the classroom is a cop-out. College Football is a money business, and yes, the students matter, but I would venture to say the money matters more.
For that matter … if you did an 8-team playoff, who would you put into it? My list …
1) Ohio State
2) Michigan
3) Florida
4) USC
5) Louisville
6) Boise State
7) Oklahoma
Wake Forest
(I figure, 6 conference champions, 2 at-large bids and/or non-BCS school rules would apply)
I do get that LSU gets screwed out of this, being #4 in the BCS, but hey, if you make the conference titles or undefeated seasons worth something (if they’re rated high enough), then almost every game keeps its significance.
Losing the bowl system? Not a chance … either make all seven games part of the bowls, OR make first round games home games to higher seed, then play a “third place game”, and you can fill your four BCS bowls that way.
It also removes the pressure to feel like you have to vote for a game, you vote for a team based on their real placement. You’d still have your “bubble” arguments, and you’d have teams playing conference championships to have a shot to win it all. Even that 9-6 Wake Forest-Georgia Tech game would have great meaning.
Ok, I just solved the problem in about 10 minutes. Can someone get the BCS conference presidents on a conference call with me?
2 Responses to Michigan got screwed … and I actually care about it too.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
In professional football, the tie-break goes to the team who won in regular season play. OSU beat Michigan. Ergo, a rematch is unnecessary. The BCS championship should be about conference champions facing one another. Your list of teams for a possible 8 team playoff is excellent, just switch UF and Michigan.
And you know how much it pains me to put Florida over.
The fact remains. Florida won the SEC. OSU is undefeated. Florida had a tougher schedule than Michigan.
Subjectively, I would rather watch a championship match between schools from different conferences.
Split national championships are a crock, especially if you’re a Bama fan. Notre Dame and Bama split three decades ago, and Bama was undefeated while ND had one loss! How do you split with ONE loss?!
Rant over. 12 national championships and counting. Our day will come. Prothro is back in the Fall; ESPN’s human highlight reel is going to be better than ever.
Heh … you putting Florida over is a sign of the apocalypse!
It is a close call, but I guess I wish that the voters would have gotten their story straight right after the OSU-Michigan game. If they thought that the rematch shouldn’t happen, it seems like then is the time to vote Michigan down to #3 or even #4, and eliminate the discussion.
Upon going back and looking at ESPN that week, the voters could have made it REALLY simple. Florida was #3 that week in the coaches’ poll, albeit beating a I-AA team, and USC won 23-9 over a ranked California (although I remember not being impressed, but that score really isn’t a bad showing). If you progress on wins, Florida could have been #2 right then, maybe you bump up USC too, and then you let it play out.
There isn’t a right answer (except that yes, split national championships are NEVER worthwhile … and Bama actually had the loss in 1973 to ND in the Sugar Bowl but still held the split, if Wikipedia is to be believed.) Just that if I am to believe what every pundit of the system has been telling me, that it’s about #1 and #2, and you initially keep Michigan at #2, they have a gripe.
I wouldn’t mind a rule change to make it “Conference Champions only” next year, or however it should be tweaked, especially since getting to the BCS title game without winning your conference isn’t unprecedented (Oklahoma in 2004, albeit in a one-loss quagmire), but I don’t think it will ever be truly better until there’s a playoff of some kind, 8-team, 16-team, whatever, and even if Michigan didn’t deserve the rematch, which is fair, I still feel like the system cheated me somehow.