SILLY SEASON, BEGIN
Before we write anything else today:
The silly season is the British term for the portion of the year–usually the first half of the summer–where stories about dogs that can type and wacky German festivals involving beer, marksmanship, and tragic combinations thereof make up the majority of the stories you see in the news. That is because, in lieu of actual events, you are fed fake ones.

We call this image “the 2005 Orange Bowl.”
A very legitimate event occurred this weekend: the Rutgers/Cincinnati game, where the Bearcats mauled (get it! silly season punnery begins!) the Scarlet Knights and thus ended the possibility of the Big East having an undefeated team. Oh, and that Ohio State-Michigan game, too, which in pre-BCS days would have qualified as the national championship game. This would have sucked of course: the Big Ten champ would have gone to the Rose Bowl, faced USC, and likely beaten them in a largely meaningless game that would have ended up with a crap split national championship, or even worse, a spuriously claimed single champion with one loss.
The real storylines end in early December with the conference championship games if your conference has one; if not, sadly, your season of actual relevant events is almost over or is in fact completely done. The brief window of addicted and happy is closing, and nothing but cold winter and the warm, woozy embrace of scotch on the sofa waits to comfort you. Good luck with that: college football is a short vacation from the rest of the year, a three to four month window of sudden, relentless competition with no preseason and a convoluted exhibition at its conclusion. The rest is silence…

That’s you around January 6th.
The silly season may begin, though, where marketeers take over and rig up a ramshackle fix of a playoff where once there were only fluffy exhibition games. These exhibition games occasionally take the form of meaningful games, as in last year’s mindbending Rose Bowl between Texas and USC, where the two best teams just happened to meet up in a stadium and play a football game.
Then there are years where math, human foibles, and fate refuse to cooperate and reduce the silly season to an event worthy of its name: something truly silly like this year’s impending matchup between USC and Ohio State, or Notre Dame and Ohio State, or even the much-touted rematch of Ohio State and Michigan.
Your absurdity in quintuplicate:
USC/Ohio State. USC has one loss to a mediocre Oregon State team, a loss which put them out of national title contention in the minds of anyone with half an iota of reason in their souls.
Notre Dame/Ohio State. The team who was beaten dizzy by Michigan will play the team that just beat Michigan and who strutted through their bowl game last year by beating…Notre Dame, the team we started out talking about in this very elliptical sentence. If this makes sense to you, you are on peyote, and it is working.
Florida/Ohio State. Murder. Simple murder. No one wants to see this, unless they take joy from the details of killing as told by the killer. Which no one likes, right?
Arkansas/Ohio State. Another profoundly silly scenario, since you bump a team that simply molested Arkansas in a game earlier this season.
Michigan/Ohio State. A rematch! The people’s choice! Drama! Jer-ry! Jer-ry! Jer-ry! Except the Michigan/OSU game was in retrospect not even that close, with a pair of gift-wrapped turnovers keeping Michigan in the game. Even with those TOs, only a last minute TD and 2 point conversion turned it into the +3 win you would expect by the home team in an even matchup. It’s not a blowout, but OSU’s been the consistently superior team between the two for the past five years. Nothing changes in a rematch.
It’s not the pure beauty contest of the past system, but it’s not in a different zip code, either. Whatever happens will be messy, stupid, poorly governed, and loaded with advertising. This describes most sport, sure; after all, the hamfisted blind ogres who run NASCAR would kill to have something that ran as “efficiently” as college football does. The guys from the NHL would probably have to be talked off the ledges if they really thought about it in comparison.
Yet it’s not anything close to logical or systematic. For a fan with even a faint loyalty to logic, clinging to the primacy of the conference championships as a system of valuation remains your only hope at seeing something resembling clarity. (You think we’re gonna run out of modifiers here? Got a whole bag waiting, man.) The rest, BCS or no, is silly season. And if you enjoy squirrels on waterskis, you’re in luck, because after Dec 3rd or so, that’s all you’re getting.

How bad is it going to get in February? Two words: Mel Kiper.









51
Daniel Adams says:
“Only a bizzare series of events which ultimately, and improbably, came to fruition made the game a possibility.”
So really, the only difference is that here, the improbable series events occurred prior to the first UM-OSU contest? Or am I missing something?
November 20th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
52
Devin McCullen says:
Before anybody gets up in arms about it, Herbie didn’t mean to completely leave Rutgers out – he just forgot them when he handed it in, and the AP said it was too late to change it, and it wouldn’t have made a difference yesterday.
And for anyone who watched some of the Rutgers game this week – now you know what a bad QB really looks like.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:37 pm
53
captaineclectic says:
Southern Cal will absolutely deserve in if they win out. It isn’t even close.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:38 pm
54
Stranko Montana says:
That is the inherent problem… USC does deserve to play for the championship… but so does Florida IF they win out… and ND and Mich aren’t exactly undeserving. It’s not like either of them lost to Oregon State, afterall. PLAYOFF, PLAYOFF, PLAYOFF!!!!
November 20th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
55
canuck says:
captain, agreed, any win by #3. failing that a strong win by #4 or two digit wins by the early mega loss teams at #5 and #6. if none of those happen the BCS is in a mess whether or not they rematch.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
56
hazer says:
No one deserves a shot at tOSU. Lets just play our conference championship games and call it a season. Theres no reason to waste any money going to all these pointless bowl games anyway.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:51 pm
57
Dave says:
To say that “if tOSU doesn’t turn the ball over three times….” is ridiculous. Fact is, turnovers are part of the game. So Michigan scores 10 points off of “part of the game.” By my count, Michigan turned the ball over twice. Hear me out here. On their second drive, Henne overthrows Maningham on what would’ve been a guaranteed 7 pts. Michigan punts. That’s essentially a turnover. Fast forward to the fourth qtr when Crable gets an unsportsmanlike conduct for helmet to helmet on Smith on a third down that was not converted. That’s essentially another turnover. So Michigan gets 10 pts from tOSU, but gives up 14 on their two “turnovers.” Seems Michigan would’ve won the game if you don’t count the “turnovers.”
November 20th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
58
GeronimoRumplestiltskin says:
Unlike so many bloggers and posters flailing away at their keyboards, I don’t want to feign being an expert in what “would” happen if team X played team Y, so I’ll just offer my hopes for the upcoming weeks:
FL and Ark both lose once, and ND finds a way to beat USC. Now no-one deserves #2, ending all arguments. OSU’s fate? Either a) they meet the Arizona Cardinals in Phoenix or b) the Sun Bowl gets cancelled (having been in El Paso quite a bit over the last couple of years – fiance’s hometown – I gathered that no one there cares about the Sun Bowl), and OSU gets an all-expenses paid trip to El Paso/Juarez to drink tequila and pick up Mexican chicks.
UM and USC play traditional Rose Bowl. Kurt Gowdy is resurrected to call game.
A&M finds a way to beat Texas, and OU gets in and wins B12 championship. Has any coach been through more this year than Bob Stoops? Losing a QB, a Heisman-caliber RB, getting screwed at Oregon? A Fiesta trip is a nice reward.
Georgia Tech wins ACC and goes to Orange Bowl. Calvin Johnson wins the “Tim Brown Best Receiver With Scatter-Armed Quarterback” trophy.
ND plays SEC champ in Sugar. While it would be great to see Mr. Quinn and Mr. Samardzija against a tough-as-cockroaches SEC defense, I’m really looking forward to the other battle: Either Florida’s “Two Yards And A Cloud Of Uncertainty” offense or Ark’s “What The Hell Do You Call This Formation Again?” offense vs. ND’s “We’ll Hold You To Only 300 Yards Of Offense. Sure, Those 300 Yards Will Come On 5 60-Yard Scoring Plays, But You’ll Only Get 300 Yards. So There.” defense. Oh, the humanity….
Oh, well, a fellow can dream…..
November 20th, 2006 at 1:54 pm
59
Steve says:
captaineclectic,
If ND beats USC, and No SEC team is left with one loss, there should be a re-match, but only in that case.
I left ND out of my argument because, they’d simply have to beat USC by a huge amount of points to convince anyone that the Michigan loss was a fluke.
I also don’t believe in re-matches or playoffs in college football, the fact that each team plays only once a year makes every game so exciting. Instead of a great home game atmosphere at the ‘Shoe, Big house, Swap, Death Valley etc. we’ll have pro-like neutral sites hosting each year’s greatest games; with pop music stars playing at half time instead of the Best Damn Band In The Land. Games like OSU/Michigan and Auburn/Alabama are so huge because we know they wont play again until next year and a playoff would ruin that. A bowl system is fine just let AP pick the champ and if two teams deserve it, so be it. I know I’m in the minority on this one, but yeah, that’s what I think.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
60
Orson Swindle says:
Geronimo, please don’t use the phrase “expert” in association with anything this blog does. Noah Webster is spinning like a compass at the North Pole at the very mention of the word.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
61
Stranko Montana says:
Sexpert, perhaps, but football experts, never.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:13 pm
62
Orson Swindle says:
Well, of course. While we’re at it, the following words need to appear more often on this blog:
“sexpert”
“sexecutioner”
“sexpatriate”
“sexcellent”
“sexculpate”–the act of making everything okay with a person by having vigorous, unexpected sex with them.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:22 pm
63
Hokie Andrew - Crosses Ocean, Lives to tell the tale... says:
I fully agree that USC, should they win out, will get the nod. And yes the SEC needs to work on their oft laughable OOC sched but it’s not like ND hasn’t had some help to remain at 1 loss. The Irish are one first down and one “Why aren’t you covering the Smajrdjajajaj$#@rja?” away from three losses.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
64
Dave says:
Oh yes, more Gwar references.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
65
GeronimoRumplestiltskin says:
Mr. Swindle and Mr. Montana:
I didn’t mean you guys, and should have included a “Orson and Stranko excepted” comment. My apologies.
My comment was an extension of something I said to my fiance Saturday at the sports bar – namingly, that everyone involved in college football thinks that they’re an expert in “what would happen if X played Y”. She listened into the conversations/discussions rumbling on around us, and concluded I was right. It may be the only example in our relationship, past and future, in which she concedes that I am right about something.
Love the blog, guys. It’s the only non-ND blog I read….
November 20th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
66
Chg says:
#16 is riddled with problems.
Most serious fans recognize the futility of six degrees of CFB losses, but you seem to enjoy it.
Here’s a few fun ones: Florida>LSU>Arizona>Oregon>Southern Cal
Arkansas>Auburn>WSU>Oregon>Southern Cal
Boise State>San Jose State >Stanford>Washington>WSU>Oregon>Southern Cal
When you lose to a mediocre team like Oregon, all sorts of manipulations are possible.
If we agree to accept all posters’ claims of allegiance at face value, the claim that only SEC fans would suggest a South-north battle was invalid when posted (post #6).
Notre Dame’s high SOS highlights a flaw in SOS ratings. They tend to exaggerate extremes. For a top ten team, Stanford/UNC/Navy/Army and LA-Monroe/Utah State/SE MO State are essentially indistinguishable. They are all punching bags that have proven themselves consistently incapable of remaining competitive with top-flight competition.
However, because ND played four teams in the 60-90 range (wild guess), the formula considers their SOS tougher than an Arkansas schedule that includes three sub-110 teams.
Regadless, Arkansas’s SOS will improve dramatically after LSU and Florida. In the unlikely event both ND and the Hogs win out, Arkansas will possess four quality wins, one bad win, and one bad loss to ND’s two quality wins, two bad wins, and one bad loss.
I can’t imagine many non-ND CFB fans arguing the Irish’s full resume was more impressive than the Hogs.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
67
Chg says:
Using Dave’s post 57 logic, I counted every positive Michigan play as an Ohio State turnover.
The Buckeyes won by a margin that could only be duplicated with an entire team of Ditkas coached by Ditka.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:43 pm
68
NoleinTexas says:
So, you guys suffer from sexlexia?
November 20th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
69
matt says:
looks like there is a glimmer of hope that Shula might be gone
November 20th, 2006 at 2:48 pm
70
Hokie Andrew - Crosses Ocean, Lives to tell the tale... says:
Just please don’t mention sextirpation…
November 20th, 2006 at 2:50 pm
71
Hokie Andrew - Crosses Ocean, Lives to tell the tale... says:
Chg is right, albeit substituting Oregon for Oregon State. The disparity in SOS rankings is more a product of it’s linear nature than any actual arguments over the validity of Team X’s awful matchups being any more or less awful than Team Y’s. Is Buffalo that much better than FIU. How could you really tell? Both are awful.
To aid in resolving this type of discussion I say we research a modified means for ranking teams. Stick with 1-25 for the top and then as you go further into the basement you develop a quality decay function – all sorts of natural process follow an exponential relationship, using one to describe the “meh” level of a CFB team is therefore a reasonable approach. Thus the difference between say #26 and #30 is much more pronounced than the difference between #50 and #80.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
72
DC Trojan says:
When you lose to a mediocre team like Oregon, all sorts of manipulations are possible.
Are you sure you didn’t mean Oregon State? There is a difference.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:02 pm
73
PW says:
Re: #19
Dear Coach Meyer,
While no one wants to see a tOSU/UM (pronounced “tOSU over UM,” a prediction of the outcome) rematch, it likely could have been avoided had your team played up to its potential this season, especially offensively. Since voters don’t actually watch the games, and computers are incapable of such a feat, these small margins of victory over much-lesser opponents, brought about by your lack of Spurrieresque killer instinct, are incredibly damaging to our BCS ranking.
Take this year’s snubbing as a lesson and let’s come back next season and try to look like the UF of the mid-90’s. You know, the UF who would throw 4th quarter TD’s while up by 30 and be unapologetic about it.
Until we have a playoff system, you can’t say “a win is a win.”
November 20th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
74
captaineclectic says:
I agree that beating LSU and Florida will give Arkansas an arguably better “overall” schedule than ND (although Navy is, what, a 10 win team this year? and clearly a cut above other punching bags), the performance against common opponents should both win out will be absolutely damning.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
75
FishFan-GatorMan says:
“…but you know we gave you guys the best game of anyone the entire season…”
ahem. [Name Redacted] and the fighting Illini held tOSU to 17 points in a game the Buckeyes are lucky to have survived. Imagine the mess the BCS would be if they had lost that one!
Bottom line is that until there is a method whereby the best teams are compelled to play each other, the whole “national championship” is a farce.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
76
DT says:
Thanks, Albino Tornado, for noting Herbstreit’s glaring omission that I also noticed. Well, probably not so glaring to most around here…but I’m glad to see that someone else noticed it as well.
An item that is not registering with most is that perhaps a “rematch” between Michigan and OSU would best be held in a CCG (imagine how greatly a similar rematch between NU & UT could’ve potentially affected the BCS picture, had the horns not dropped to ksu)? Oh, that’s right, the big ten doesn’t want to do that…that might actually render useless the “rugged big ten schedule” garbage that we endlessly hear so much about.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:35 pm
77
Chuck says:
It’s three words: Mel Kiper Jr. Thankyouverymuch.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
78
yz says:
i believe that, per ncaa regs, you are not allowed a CCG unless you have 2 divisions, each with at least 6 teams. further,
“and along those lines, assuming texas beats a&m fri, should they really have to play neb again to win the big 12? i know, i know, texas isn’t the juggernaut it was with v young, and arguably have been over-rated all season, but why have to prove yourself over again? isn’t that why they played the first game? say the unthinkable happens and colo beats neb. now you could possibly have a 4 loss team in the bcs. as conf champion.
the sec, acc, and big 12 all went to 12 teams with the sole purpose of being able to schedule a conf championship game, and thus another bcs bowl-like payday for the conference (tv-wise). seems like it just increases the odds of someone getting hosed. by their own league.”
November 20th, 2006 at 4:59 pm
79
Pants McPants says:
Good discussion of the SOS fallacy inherent in the sysytem….
If you play #1 and #100, you have the same initial SOS component of a team that played #49 and #51…Of course, the first team in that scenario has a MUCH bigger chance at a loss than the second. In fact, elite team competing for an NC should pound any team below #30 or so, thus the lower rankings are meaningless. Taking this to an extreme, a team that plays 5 11-1 teams and 6 1-11 teams is worse than one that plays 11 6-6 teams, yet the latter only needs to be above average to go undefeated and the former must beat 5 elite level teams…
Sure, these are extremes, but it shows that you need to look beyond the numbers to rank teams by schedule…people who try to trumpet their schedules by bringing up the dregs of others should remember, if you’re an elite team, it shouldn’t matter whether you play Navy, Washington, Buffalo, or Temple….You should beat any of them easily anyway….
November 20th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
80
Wooderson says:
Pants,
Navy’s already going to a bowl game. Westenr Carolina is going home for thanksgiving dinner and staying there. big difference.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
81
J-skool says:
Re: #73
While I can agree with you on the should-UF-had-taken-care-of-business argument with regard to the Auburn game, I disagree with your expectations for the season.
Florida, quite obviously, laid an egg in the second half in Jordan-Hare — reffing aside. Sure, some credit should go to the Auburn defense, but a look at that first half foretold a big win for the O&B. The side just didn’t follow through.
Most Gators (and non-Gators), however, would agree Florida’s outside chance at the 2006 National Title is a substantial surprise. The SEC title game was a goal high enough for this squad of underachievers.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
82
yz says:
doesn’t SOS take into account who the opponents played? thus if the 5 11-1 teams played the 6 1-11 teams, that gets reflected.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
83
Pants McPants says:
Wooderson….
Minnesota is going bowling as well…So is Cincinnati….
If you think of yourselves as a National Championship level team, you will never feel the need to speak of them….You will beat them 38-7 or 44-3 and move on…
November 20th, 2006 at 5:30 pm
84
FishFan-GatorMan says:
Since we are playing “what if” I thought I’d throw this into the pot. What if Florida’s punter doesn’t drop the snap that resulted in Auburn’s winning TD? Assuming that they would win out, an undefeated Gator team would be, for sure, facing OSU in Glendale. There would be no talk of ugly wins, or weak offense, or strength of schedule yet it would be the same exact team. One play folks.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
85
j.j. says:
The Mich-OSU game from this year sort of reminds me of the Fiesta Bowl last year, in terms of how one-sided the game was despite the close score. The Wolverines have an excellent defense and they still got throttled.
I either want Boise St to play Ohio St or Notre Dame. In one case, ND gets an excellent shot at a bowl win. In the other, we all get to see the pride of the mid-majors get its balls cut off on national TV. If the line were OSU -72, I’d probably take the Bucks.
Aside from that, I’d like to see Michigan play USC, like everyone’s saying, in a return to the classic Rose Bowl. And I don’t really care what happens in the other games. Florida deserves a shot at OSU if they win out.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
86
Brandon says:
If you want to count every time that one team made a mistake as a turnover, we can certainly add Henne’s inability to hit a wide open receiver. I’m sure there were more than three Buckeye mistakes in that second half too. That’s not the point.
The point is, and there is no arguing this, OSU was the better team on Saturday. They beat UM fair and square. It was one helluva a football game and I enjoyed every minute of it.
The biggest problem I have with a rematch is the fact that it essentially makes that game that was just played completely meaningless. The point was made early that OSU should not have to beat UM twice to win a National Championship when UM would only have to beat OSU once.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
87
DT says:
yz: I’m just saying that the playing field is uneven. If we have to be forced to watch two teams from the same conference rehash a regular season matchup…we should see that in a CCG like we do everywhere else. For the “big ten” it’s as simple as giving ND the ultimatum of either joining the big eleven, or losing the cushy “lose two..but wipe the floor with the service academies & you’re in!” deal they’ve got now. Your UT scenario is a weak argument, only because they happened to play NU this year. What happens if A&M beats them and OU takes the south…they haven’t played NU, so the CCG would no longer be a case of having to “prove it all over again”. Or if the situation mirrored osu/Michigan & UT was undefeated and was NU’s lone loss, how big does that rematch look now?
I guess it’s really just a matter of would you rather have an 8 team playoff, composed of 6 conference champs and the two highest ranked “at large” teams or the mess we currently have on an annual basis. And to me, I can’t see how that can possibly happen until the remaining “power” conferences get on board and meet the same conference championship requirements as the others. I don’t personally think that an 8 team playoff (rooted in the big-4 bowls, with three games to follow) where every participant must win their conference championship game would take anything away from weekly competition and the theory that “every game counts” that we currently enjoy. I think that you may possibly see more 2-loss teams thrown into the picture in a given year, but I don’t think it would diminish the regular season all that much. Just my opinion.
And what ever happened to the argument that was used so often five years ago…that a team that failed to win their conference had no business in the MNC discussion. Herbstreit used to be a clear proponent of that school of thought, until about the time on Saturday when it looked like his buckeyes might possibly not win their conference. Looks like Kirk isn’t the only big 10 apologist who has conveniently forgotten this premise.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:11 pm
88
oc phil says:
#84
USC was only a missed two-point conversion away from staying alive against Oregon State (or if they had made one less turnover it would have been the same thing). Given the way the 4th quarter of that game went I have no doubt that USC would have won in overtime.
Lots of games come down to one play. That’s the way the sport works. The fact is Florida did lose to AU and USC lost to Oregon State.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:25 pm
89
j.j. says:
Excellent posts today.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:41 pm
90
SeaTrojan says:
Fellas, just a little more mental masturbation from all of us – and we’ll solve this BCS thing.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:44 pm
91
officepoolprincess says:
I like the squirrel on waterskis tee hee. (blonde moment)
November 20th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
92
officepoolprincess says:
How about sexpertise?
November 20th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
93
dixiehog says:
Just want to know how ( if arkansas wins out) they will have beaten #22 alabama #13 Tennessee #10 LSU #4 Florida and #2 auburn 5 top 25 teams (ranking at time game was played) with a loss to #3 USC, so how the heck would they wind up behind Michigan, Notre Dame etc….how many ranked teams have they beaten total?
previuosly arkansas has had the 6th and 3rd toughest schedule in the country so excuse them for having a “soft” non conferance schedule this year (see above)
November 20th, 2006 at 7:27 pm
94
Marc Ruffalo says:
sos debate (simplified)
schedule A: 3 games you are a 10:1 favorite, 4 a 5:1, 2 a 3:1 and 3 a 1:1
schedule B: 3 games you are a 6:1, 4 a 3:1, 4 a 2:1 and 1 a 1:1.
To the average observer Sched A would seem tougher because of more “big-time games”.
Mathematically Schedule B would be the much tougher on to get through undefeated.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
95
yz says:
dt,
where in the world did you conjure up the idea that the big 1? holds any sway over nd? they’ve been trying to get them to join for years, to no avail. the only leverage they have is to stop scheduling nd.
and i’m not sure how the ut-neb argument is weak, when you propose the same thing for tOSU-mich.and if a&m beats texas, personally i don’t like the idea of the osu/neb winner being in a playoff for the nc.
my point was not about rematches (and for the record, if it were reversed, i don’t think ut should have to play neb again, nor do i with the current records), but about how the conf champ game seems more and more about the law of unintended consequences. ( i.e. to screw the conference, especially if they have two highly rated teams, one of which would play for the nc if they win, when they have already beaten their opponent for the CCG.)
i could say the same about the sec, especially if mc farkansas loses to lsu and then beats fla.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
96
yz says:
one other thing about the uneven playing field. back in the day, you could play a hellacious schedule, lose 1 game and still be nat champs if someone was unbeaten, but played nobody. where that changed i don’t know (um, byu?). we like to say the best team has no losses, but the exact opposite argument has been used all year long in the case of lsu and texas.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:49 pm
97
yz says:
at least by the likes of craig james, stewart mandel, jason whitlock, and a few others.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:51 pm
98
Albino Tornado says:
Well, as an NU fan, I’m a touch sensitive to such omissions. And the NU/A&M inversion isn’t the most obvious omission on his ballot — he left Rutgers off completely.
I know they played like crap against Cincy, but Come. On.
I’m guessing he woke up in a puppy pile of grateful mustachioed Ohio State “lovelies” and picked teams at semi-random… or let the “brain trust” of Corso, May, and Granny Clampett fill it out.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:41 pm
99
PCB says:
Let’s correct a factual inaccuracy regarding USC and Big-10 teams: USC usually wins in the Rose Bowl. This took at least 7 years off of Bo Schembechler’s life and that’s why he gave his life to motivate a close game by his beloved Fichigan Wolverines versus the Buckeyes.
If USC wins out, they deserve a shot against OSU (even if those initials were unlucky for them earlier this year) and I wouldn’t bet against Pete Carroll!
Fight on!
November 21st, 2006 at 12:21 am
100
DT says:
“we like to say the best team has no losses, but the exact opposite argument has been used all year long in the case of lsu and texas. at least by the likes of craig james, stewart mandel, jason whitlock, and a few others.”
As a Nebraska fan, I have a wealth of experience that leads me to agree with you when you say that any CCG is a hose job at one time or anoher. I just think that a playoff (whose participants would be selected, based largely on being conference champs) would be far more fair to everyone involved. Now that the Pac 10 has every team play one another, that’s fine that they don’t have a CCG. But the only other way to ensure that happens in a 12-team conference is by having a CCG. But I’ve come to believe that making the field by winning one’s conference (or else being one of the two highest-ranked non-conf. champs) is a much better way, because it actually has something to do with what happens on the field. Teams control their own ability to win their conference and this takes the power away from a bunch of writers, sportscasters & coaches who (as was made apparent way back at #31) are fucking clueless. It wouldn’t matter any more what James/whitlock/et al think about who’s better than who…all that would matter would be if you won your conference championship head-to-head on the field of play. And that being the format that I would propose…I don’t really care about Notre Dame and their ego. In this hypothetical fantasy-land, they could either join a conference, or call themselves the people’s champs every year for all I care. To me, the most logical fit would be to preserve the many rivalries that ND has established with big 10 teams.
But most of all, as a big 12 fan, I guess I’ve had my head filled with this for about the last five years to the point where I actually buy that a team should win their conference to qualify for a BCS slot..but here’s an example of the playing field being uneven: I don’t get the double standard that dictates that in 2003 & 2001, OU & NU should’ve been penalized for losing/not participating in a game that didn’t even exist for the other team in question (USC/Oregon)…but now, somehow the same people who employed that logic are willing to change course and make an exception for michigan, when other one-loss conference champions will likely be filling the USC/Oregon role?! The hypocrisy of such people leaves me feeling that we need some type of overhaul to the system, that would take any and all power out of their hands and eliminate this obviously-biased selection process. In my eyes, the “season-long playoff” argument is blown all to hell when–at the last minute–the powers that be decide to turn it into a double-elimination by their poll ballots…when just a few years ago, they used their ballot to try and prevent the exact same thing from happening in the case of another team. I’m fine with a two or three loss conference champ making it into an 8-team playoff field every so often…if it means that the fate of deserving teams is left to be determined on the field, and no longer by the so-called experts. Like the EDSBS mission statement says: “college football is far too important to be left to the professionals.” Right now, the whole process is about the equivalent of having Michael Kors & Nina Garcia chat it out with the producers, as Heidi Klum announces who’s in and who’s out. And as evidenced by Herbstreit’s most recent AP ballot…many would agree that Heidi Klum would actually do about as good a job.
Sorry for the deeply off-topic rant…it’s been awhile & we’re 100 posts deep, so what the hell.
November 21st, 2006 at 2:31 am