Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

SOURCE: UF #2 in BCS

As they should be.

Having a conference runner-up (Michigan) playing in the BCS title game over a conference winner (toughest conference in the country, no less), would be inexcusable.
 
Im fine with it. The SEC is one of the hardest confrences in college football (as evident based on the fact that 4 SEC teams are in the top 12). While Michigan would've been a good rematch, Florida has earned a chance to play OSU for the National Champioship, Michigan had their chance. Instead of complaining about it too, they should be happy to go to a BCS game, beat USC soundly, and then state their case. No point in complaining before you even play the game, that's nothing more than a distraction. Should be a good game either way and the other BCS game matchups look solid.
 
Huge said:
As they should be.

Having a conference runner-up (Michigan) playing in the BCS title game over a conference winner (toughest conference in the country, no less), would be inexcusable.
Click to expand...

Speaking of inexcusable, how about that BCS system for you. Good for Florida, they were a better team than USC anyhow. I'm sick of the NCAA hoping to avoid scandal every year instead of letting the thing get sorted out on the field instead of computers and polls.

Florida should be playing Michigan for the right to meet OSU on a neutral field, IMO.
 
rmartin65 said:
I dont know about this. It is not right to punish a team for not playing.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the voters know better, but a lot of people think because the Big Ten doesn't have a conference championship (because we only have 11 teams) that we play TWO fewer games. People think I lie when I explain we play an extra game where other teams would have byes.

Since we sit idle last week people assume that we only play 11 games. Weird.
 
And Michigan is getting screwed by the system, can't argue against that. They've been passed by TWO teams, because that's what the voters want to see.

I hope they give USC a beat down, as much as I hate Meatchicken.
 
Yankee_In_TX said:
And Michigan is getting screwed by the system, can't argue against that. They've been passed by TWO teams, because that's what the voters want to see.

I hope they give USC a beat down, as much as I hate Meatchicken.
Click to expand...

This is my problem with the human polls.

How can the BCS be effective if the human polls aren't fair?

There is too much bias. A team shouldn't be penalized just because that isnt who you wanna see in the game.
 
Yankee_In_TX said:
I'm sure the voters know better, but a lot of people think because the Big Ten doesn't have a conference championship (because we only have 11 teams) that we play TWO fewer games. People think I lie when I explain we play an extra game where other teams would have byes.

Since we sit idle last week people assume that we only play 11 games. Weird.
Click to expand...

I wish the Big Ten could get ND and then implement a conference championship game. If I ran the BCS, it would be limited to conference champions only to basically force ND to join a conference.

Anyway, if true, I'm glad Florida is in.
 
there's no way the big 10 would ever have a conference championship. they want OSU/Michigan to be the final game of the season. and it should be, really.
 
kastofsna said:
there's no way the big 10 would ever have a conference championship. they want OSU/Michigan to be the final game of the season. and it should be, really.
Click to expand...

I agree but ND has to be forced into a conference.

It is pathetic how many loopholes they have as an independent.
 
I dunno. Every conference had their traditional last games before championship games came around. I don't know why the Big Ten couldn't. I seem to remember the Rose Bowl saying they would ALWAYS be the Pac-10 / Big-10 champions.......see how long that lasted. Its all about the dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top