<p>would you guys rather see florida win or florida get absolutely annihilated?</p>
<p>I think we can all agree the worst case scenario is florida losing by less than 3.</p>
<p>i thnk the general consensus is we want florida to get wrecked so it shows mich was really no.2 and had a chance at no.1</p>
<p>is the winner of the NC game the official national champion this year? suppose FL barely beats OSU, and we destroy USC...are the polls obligated to choose the winner of the NC game as #1?</p>
<p>There is no way Florida can beat Ohio State. Florida is the most undeserving team for the title game. They beat Georgia, Vanderbilt, South Carolina and Florda State by a combined 21 points, and none of these teams are ranked. They barely beat Tennessee by 1 point earlier in the season. Florida could (should) have lost one or more of these games if they weren't so lucky.</p>
<p>The only way for them to have a chance is for Troy Smith to sit on the bench for the whole game.</p>
<p>Btw, isn't it ironic that you don't hear any noise about a BCS playoff any more?</p>
<p>You want irony?</p>
<p>1) 1996: 10-0 FSU beat 10-0 Florida in the final game of the regular season. Guess who 11-0 FSU met at the Sugar Bowl in what was essentially the national title game? Yes, you guessed it Florida. 1996 was a near replica of this year's scenario. OSU (like FSU in 1996) was #1. Michigan (like Florida in 1996) was #2. The game was played at the #1 team's stadium. The #1 team won by 3 points. Unlike this year however, the #2 team was believed to be good enough to deserve a second shot because losing by just 3 points on the road made them capable of winning in a neutral site. Florida went on to destroy FSU and won the National Championship. Ironic that Florida, which benefited from this exact scenario in 1996 felt that a repeat of such a case in 2006 would have been unfair. </p>
<p>2) 2001: #1 Nebraska loses in 36-62 to the Big XII championship game (that's the last game of the regular season mind you). Guess who met #1 Miami in the Rose Bowl for the title game that year? Yup, you guessed it, Nebraska. </p>
<p>3) 2003: #1 Oklahoma loses 7-35 to Kansas State in the Big XII championship game (again, that's the last game of the regular season). Guess who got to meet LSU in the BCS title game? Yep, you guessed it, Oklahoma.</p>
<p>Isn't amazing how those two Big XII teams were BLOWN OUT by very average competition in the final game of the regular season and in neutral territory and they still managed to make it to the title game and yet, Michigan, which lost by 3 points to a much better team than Colorado or Kansas state and in the opponent's very hostile stadium somehow managed to not get a second chance.</p>
<p>In short, all those pollsters who felt that Michigan didn't deserve a spot in the BCS title game because they had already played OSU and therefore had "their chance" or because Michigan lost late in the season or wasn't conference champions were lying. Those same pollsters chose to be flexible three times in the last decade for far less worthy teams. Needless to say, I am disgusted. But there is a positive here. Michigan will not be part of a controversial and tainted national championship.</p>
<p>Let me get this straight: Michigan, which was unbeaten against all teams on its schedule ranked lower than No. 1, isn't going to Glendale, Ariz., for the Jan. 8 national title game because ...</p>
<p> It didn't win its conference.</p>
<p>No, it didn't. But did you see who did? Team by the name of Ohio State. Maybe you've heard of the Buckeyes? Undefeated. Ranked first in the country. Beat Michigan in Columbus by the grand total of three whole points.</p>
<p>And feel free to show me in the BCS handbook where it says you've got to win your conference to play in the championship game?</p>
<p> Nobody wants to see a rematch.</p>
<p>Just asking, but how did Ali-Frazier II and III work out? Or that Georgetown-Villanova Final Four?</p>
<p>I know Florida's Urban Meyer doesn't want to see a rematch, but he's not exactly an impartial observer, is he? And if Meyer were in Carr's Nikes, I guarantee you his objections to a second Ohio State-Michigan game would have disappeared.</p>
<p>A rematch, this time on a neutral field, would have been a game for the ages. And if you threatened to take away his precious sweater vest if he didn't tell the truth, I bet you Buckeyes' coach Jim Tressel would rather play Florida than have to face the Wolverines again (Tressel declined to vote in the final coaches' poll).</p>
<p> Florida played a tougher schedule.</p>
<p>Agreed. But strength of schedule is part of the equation, nothing more. Tuberville's 2004 team had the strongest strength of schedule, but didn't make it.</p>
<p>You want to give the Gators the edge based on scheduling? Fair enough, though you could argue that Florida didn't exactly beat vintage Alabama, Georgia and Florida State teams this year, and Central Florida and Division I-AA Western Carolina were dreadful.</p>
<p>And look at the one loss each suffered by Florida and Michigan on their schedules. You tell me which defeat was more impressive: the Gators' 10-point road loss to an Auburn team that finished the season No. 9 in the BCS standings? Or the Wolverines' three-point road loss to an Ohio State now favored to win the national championship?</p>
<p> The BCS system rewarded Florida for finishing its season with wins at FSU and against Arkansas at the SEC championship in Atlanta.</p>
<p>And the BCS penalized Michigan twice for being on the wrong end of the calendar: once when USC moved to No. 2 after beating Notre Dame (even though Michigan beat the Irish worse), and now, when Florida overtook the Wolverines (even though U of M's season ended two weeks ago).</p>
<p>How can you call this a "system" when Florida belongs to a league that plays a conference championship, and Michigan doesn't? How can you call it a quasi-playoff when Michigan drops twice in the standings without losing a game.</p>
<p> Florida has earned the right to play Ohio State.</p>
<p>Absolutely true. But so has Michigan.</p>
<p>Ask the coaches at Vanderbilt (the Commodores played both Michigan and Florida this season) who is the better team, and the consensus pick -- privately, of course -- is the Wolverines. Florida has more speed and a handful of players to die for, they say, but Michigan is more physical, would control both sides of the line of scrimmage, have wonderful wide receivers, and are led by a senior quarterback who doesn't make many mistakes.</p>
<p>Ask them who would give Ohio State the better game, and you'll get the same answer.</p>
<p>Michigan never had that chance. It was 11-1 on Nov. 18. It was 11-1 on Dec. 3. But between then and now the Wolverines apparently became the cellulite queens and somehow lost the swimsuit portion of this ridiculous BCS beauty pageant.</p>
<p>*** I hope Chris Leak and the Gators get SPANKED by Troy Smith and the *****eyes!! How SAD is this - to have to cheer for Notre Dame AND OSU in the same season??</p>
<p>I don't think any of us need to cheer for the Buckeyes. The name will be over before half time.</p>
<p>^^ i know, its a travesty to mich fans everywhere</p>
<p>and hennes only a junior</p>
<p>Interesting article below.</p>
<p>yeah both Michigan/USC and Ohio State/Florida will be blowouts. No team can compare to Michigan except for Ohio State and vice versa.</p>
<p>I don't know if we'll blow out USC but OSU is definitely going to bury Florida.</p>
<p>When a shot at a national title was in the balance, Lloyd Carr, the old Michigan man, proved that even in this hyper-competitive era, even in this senseless system, the values he always expounds – pride, respect, humility – still can take precedent over all.</p>
<p>yea... even if we arent the best in the land were the classiest in the land</p>
<p>Great article. Somehow I feel that Bo would have done the same. I still remember Bo firing Bill Frieder on the eve of the NCAA tournament ... on the principle that a Michigan team be coached by a Michigan Man ... and named assistant Steve Fisher as interim coach for the team that eventually won the NCAA tournament.</p>
<p>
[quote]
yeah both Michigan/USC and Ohio State/Florida will be blowouts
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You'd hope history has no bearing because: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>In the last 58 games USC played, they won 54 of them with four losses by a combined 12 points over that span.</p></li>
<li><p>The Trojans have a 5-2 record against the Wolverines in the Rose Bowl including a 28-14 triumph three years ago.</p></li>
<li><p>USC has played in 30 previous Rose Bowl games, going 21-9, while Michigan has played in 19, going 8-11.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>the only history i need to look at is recent history. usc has lost to ore st. u and ucla...that's all the history i need to show me why mich is gonna roll over usc, regardless of the fact that the rose bowl will essentially be a home game for usc.</p>
<p>I agree with Sam. USC is VERY tough in the Rose Bowl. It is practically a home game for them. Let us face it. A Big 10 team must travel 2,000+ miles accross 2-3 time zones and play in temperatures 20-40 degrees warmer than what they are used to. Of course, the actual stadium is generally 70%-80% in favor of the Trojans, so that doesn't help any either. </p>
<p>This year, I expect Michigan to win, but it won't be a blowout. I think we win by 7-10 points.</p>
<p>djteej83---did u get that from espn? looks familiar, with the henne mistake and all</p>
<p>So much for a "neutral" field.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the actual stadium is generally 70%-80% in favor of the Trojans, so that doesn't help any either.
[/quote]
Which is why I'd never attend another Rose Bowl with a Cal-based team. We were at the '04 game and it was outrageous. First, Wolverine fans couldn't even get tickets. The Alumni Association had to limit 2 per customer since so few had been released to U-M and the demand was great. Then, we make the long and expensive trek out to Cali and are overwhelmed by a stadium filled to the brim with obnoxious USC fans. Talk about home field advantage. Getting our a**es kicked was the crushing blow. As an alum, I always had wanted to attend a Rose Bowl game, but the actual experience was underwhelming. Despite its history, that stadium just doesn't compare to the Big House.</p>
<p>In LA, a lot of people with no affliation with UCLA actually hate USC. I've met people over and over how they hate USC because they got tired of them winning so many games and they thought this is still a school full of obnoxious and spoiled kids. So just outside that stadium, a lot of people will be rooting for Michigan. Hope this help. :)</p>