LA Times: Florida & OSU in BCS Championship - Page 3

Tchocky · 12-03-2006, 11:22 PM

And especially if a conference is tough, you can't judge a team by wins alone. Decent teams will often go 7-5 if they play a bear of a schedule.

And at least Michigan didn't play any I-AA teams to pad their win total.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

FLORDIA'S SCHEDULE:

Tennessee - solid
Auburn - overrated
Georgia - overrated

MICHIGAN'S SCHEDULE

Wisconsin - underrated
Minnesota - semi-decent
Michigan State - semi-decent

Iowa - decent

I'd say it's about even.

hahahahahahaha

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

And at least Michigan didn't play any I-AA teams to pad their win total.

Playing Ball St. is equivalent to playing a I-AA school.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

And especially if a conference is tough, you can't judge a team by wins alone. Decent teams will often go 7-5 if they play a bear of a schedule.

So when Florida goes 12-1 in the best conference in the country they don't deserve a title shot? what?

Trotskilicious · 12-03-2006, 11:26 PM

yeah i love the idea that Minnesota and Michigan State are on the same level as South Carolina and Iowa is a step above. I mean really, what a bunch of bull.

Wisconsin would probably get beat by Georgia and they're the worst of the good teams in the SEC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tchocky

And at least Michigan didn't play any I-AA teams to pad their win total.

What do you need them for when you have Northwestern, Indiana, and Ball State on your schedule?

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:26 PM

it's absolutely mind blowing that anyone would call a fifth ranked Badger team underrated. Mind blowing.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

yeah i love the idea that Minnesota and Michigan State are on the same level as South Carolina and Iowa is a step above. I mean really, what a bunch of bull.

Wisconsin would probably get beat by Georgia and they're the worst of the good teams in the SEC.

What do you need them for when you have Northwestern, Indiana, and Ball State on your schedule?

Why did we have so much disagreement earlier in the season?

Trotskilicious · 12-03-2006, 11:27 PM

By the way both Central Michigan and Southern Mississippi played for their conference titles so they aren't actually stinkers, but they certainly aren't on the level of Florida and Michigan.

Your little review shows you how little you actually know about football.

Trotskilicious · 12-03-2006, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eulogy

Why did we have so much disagreement earlier in the season?

The fact that I thought that it was pathetic how badly ND lost to UM.

mv2007 · 12-03-2006, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eulogy

Playing Ball St. is equivalent to playing a I-AA school.

Didn't Michigan win that game by 8? At least UF beat Western Carolina 62-0.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

The fact that I thought that it was pathetic how badly ND lost to UM.

I never disagreed with that.

Trotskilicious · 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mv2007

Didn't Michigan win that game by 8? At least UF beat Western Carolina 62-0.

Yeah Michigan also sucked balls against Northwestern. In fact there was a solid month where they were playing teams like Penn State, Iowa, NW, and Ball State and and failed to look impressive at all. Meanwhile Florida continues to win against teams that would absolutely make those four schools look like chumps. Like LSU, Tennessee, Arkansas, and South Carolina.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mv2007

Didn't Michigan win that game by 8? At least UF beat Western Carolina 62-0.

Bringing margin of victory up in this conversation will lead to dumbass Big Ten fans jumping all over the Gators and say they weren't impressive in all their wins.

Tchocky · 12-03-2006, 11:31 PM

I think that Michigan is the better team. It has nothing to do with strength of schedule or who placed where in what conference. On paper, I'd like Michigan's chances against OSU over Florida's chances. I think Michigan has the only defense in the country capable of keeping up with the Buckeyes (and even that's questionable considering they gave up 42 points to OSU), and I think that Carr's pro-style offense matches up better against OSU as opposed to Meyer's shotgun offense.

Seeing as the best defense in the country couldn't keep up with Smith, Ginn, Gonzalez and co., I advise Florida to bring some butter to Glendale, because they're gonna get toasted.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I think that Michigan is the better team. It has nothing to do with strength of schedule or who placed where in what conference. On paper, I'd like Michigan's chances against OSU over Florida's chances. I think Michigan has the only defense in the country capable of keeping up with the Buckeyes (and even that's questionable considering they gave up 42 points to OSU), and I think that Carr's pro-style offense matches up better against OSU as opposed to Meyer's shotgun offense.

Seeing as the best defense in the country couldn't keep up with Smith, Ginn, Gonzalez and co., I advise Florida to bring some butter to Glendale, because they're gonna get toasted.

It's hard to make a case for the Wolverine defense when they got absolutely blitzed by the one good team they faced all year.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:32 PM

at least you accepted defeat with your assinine schedule assessment.

Tchocky · 12-03-2006, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

By the way both Central Michigan and Southern Mississippi played for their conference titles so they aren't actually stinkers, but they certainly aren't on the level of Florida and Michigan.

Your little review shows you how little you actually know about football.

Believe me, I'm well-aware of CMU playing for the MAC championship...I go to Western Michigan, remember? Nevertheless, games that pit MAC schools againt good Big Ten schools are often laughably lopsided.

Tchocky · 12-03-2006, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eulogy

at least you accepted defeat with your assinine schedule assessment.

It's NOT asinine. Auburn and Georgia are overrated...and Tennessee could be considered that, too.

Michigan State was killed by John L. Smith. They actually had a good offense this year, but Smith is a buffoon who lost control of his team and deserved to get fired. Wisconsin is better than people give them credit for, yeah I was generous with Minnesota (but their running game is good), and Iowa was decimated by injuries this year and should have been better than they were.

Trotskilicious · 12-03-2006, 11:39 PM

Again, the person arguing on behalf of Michigan is from the state OF Michigan, which doesn't surprise me in the least. I think Nate is the only person outside of that state to actually try and make a case for that team playing for the national title.

Let's look at this critically: if michigan is the second best team in the country, they already had their shot to beat Ohio State and fail. Why on EARTH should they get a re-match so they can lose again (sorry guys, they will lose again)? How can you possibly quantify such a statement in the first place? I think if a team shows that they can survive throughout the season with one loss they should get a chance to play for the national championship in a year without two undefeated. IF ONE OF THOSE LOSSES IS TO THE UNDEFEATED, THEY ARE ELIMINATED. It is simple, basic logic and I can't believe I'm still arguing on behalf of Florida who more than deserve the opprotunity to lose to Ohio State, because NO ONE is beating them this year.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

It's NOT asinine. Auburn and Georgia are overrated...and Tennessee could be considered that, too.

Michigan State was killed by John L. Smith. They actually had a good offense this year, but Smith is a buffoon who lost control of his team and deserved to get fired. Wisconsin is better than people give them credit for, yeah I was generous with Minnesota (but their running game is good), and Iowa was decimated by injuries this year and should have been better than they were.

Does it matter how good teams were supposed to be? what the fuck? Iowa sucked. doesn't matter why. Same for MSU. Auburn, Georgia, and Tennessee with Eric Ainge would compete in the Big Ten without question.

so yeah, it's asinine. sorry for the misspelling.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

NO ONE is beating them this year.

Keep hope alive, man.

GO GATORS.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:43 PM

uhhh what's with the ref's pants in the NFL? have they been like this all year?

Trotskilicious · 12-03-2006, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

It's NOT asinine. Auburn and Georgia are overrated...and Tennessee could be considered that, too.

Michigan State was killed by John L. Smith. They actually had a good offense this year, but Smith is a buffoon who lost control of his team and deserved to get fired. Wisconsin is better than people give them credit for, yeah I was generous with Minnesota (but their running game is good), and Iowa was decimated by injuries this year and should have been better than they were.

I'm done with this guy. Ok dude yeah we should put Iowa back in the top 25 because we should be nice to them because they had a lot of injuries. You know you're right, those teams like Auburn and Tennessee that have two losses in the SEC are overrated. Auburn's defense isn't lights out and Tennessee doesn't have one of the most explosive offenses in the land that scored like 28 points in 10 minutes against Georgia. How wrong I was. Iowa is just as good as Auburn if both teams are healthy. You're so right.

Trotskilicious · 12-03-2006, 11:44 PM

i wonder if anyone in michigan would be arguing on behalf of an ohio state berth in the NC had michigan won that game.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:45 PM

The way the Big Ten jacks off all over itself makes me think they might.

Tchocky · 12-03-2006, 11:48 PM

You're implying that the regular season is essentially a playoffs. I disagree, and your take on the season is one of the reasons I think there should be a playoff system. I think that if we're going to have a "you had your turn, let someone else try" system, then there should be something at least a little more substantial to it than what we've got, which is just poll averages and strength of schedule crap, both of which are subjective.

The two best teams should play for the championship, regardless of whether or not they've already played.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

You're implying that the regular season is essentially a playoffs. I disagree, and your take on the season is one of the reasons I think there should be a playoff system. I think that if we're going to have a "you had your turn, let someone else try" system, then there should be something at least a little more substantial to it than what we've got, which is just poll averages and strength of schedule crap, both of which are subjective.

The two best teams should play for the championship, regardless of whether or not they've already played.

you realize that it's now hard to take anything you say seriously after you made a case for how good Iowa and MSU were based on how good they were supposed to be, right?

Tchocky · 12-03-2006, 11:55 PM

You know what? Fine. U of M played a cupcake schedule. There, I said it. And just because Auburn/Tennessee/Georgia>MSU/Wisconsin/Iowa, we should just totally disregard how good Michigan is and put a gimmicky offensive team with no defense in the national title game. You got your wish. Enjoy.

Eulogy · 12-03-2006, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

You know what? Fine. U of M played a cupcake schedule. There, I said it. And just because Auburn/Tennessee/Georgia>MSU/Wisconsin/Iowa, we should just totally disregard how good Michigan is and put a gimmicky offensive team with no defense in the national title game. You got your wish. Enjoy.

You don't go through the SEC with one loss if you have no defense.

There's just more evidence backing Florida than Michigan. I hope Michigan gets rolled in the Rose Bowl.

mv2007 · 12-03-2006, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eulogy

uhhh what's with the ref's pants in the NFL? have they been like this all year?

I noticed this too. I don't like it one bit, although it is 18 degrees in Denver.

12-03-2006, 11:22 PM	#61
Tchocky Minion of Satan Location: Wher I en nd yu begn Posts: 6,996	And especially if a conference is tough, you can't judge a team by wins alone. Decent teams will often go 7-5 if they play a bear of a schedule. And at least Michigan didn't play any I-AA teams to pad their win total.

12-03-2006, 11:26 PM	#66
Eulogy huh Posts: 62,361	it's absolutely mind blowing that anyone would call a fifth ranked Badger team underrated. Mind blowing.

12-03-2006, 11:27 PM	#68
Trotskilicious Banned Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship. Posts: 39,602	By the way both Central Michigan and Southern Mississippi played for their conference titles so they aren't actually stinkers, but they certainly aren't on the level of Florida and Michigan. Your little review shows you how little you actually know about football.

12-03-2006, 11:31 PM	#74
Tchocky Minion of Satan Location: Wher I en nd yu begn Posts: 6,996	I think that Michigan is the better team. It has nothing to do with strength of schedule or who placed where in what conference. On paper, I'd like Michigan's chances against OSU over Florida's chances. I think Michigan has the only defense in the country capable of keeping up with the Buckeyes (and even that's questionable considering they gave up 42 points to OSU), and I think that Carr's pro-style offense matches up better against OSU as opposed to Meyer's shotgun offense. Seeing as the best defense in the country couldn't keep up with Smith, Ginn, Gonzalez and co., I advise Florida to bring some butter to Glendale, because they're gonna get toasted.

12-03-2006, 11:32 PM	#76
Eulogy huh Posts: 62,361	at least you accepted defeat with your assinine schedule assessment.

12-03-2006, 11:39 PM	#79
Trotskilicious Banned Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship. Posts: 39,602	Again, the person arguing on behalf of Michigan is from the state OF Michigan, which doesn't surprise me in the least. I think Nate is the only person outside of that state to actually try and make a case for that team playing for the national title. Let's look at this critically: if michigan is the second best team in the country, they already had their shot to beat Ohio State and fail. Why on EARTH should they get a re-match so they can lose again (sorry guys, they will lose again)? How can you possibly quantify such a statement in the first place? I think if a team shows that they can survive throughout the season with one loss they should get a chance to play for the national championship in a year without two undefeated. IF ONE OF THOSE LOSSES IS TO THE UNDEFEATED, THEY ARE ELIMINATED. It is simple, basic logic and I can't believe I'm still arguing on behalf of Florida who more than deserve the opprotunity to lose to Ohio State, because NO ONE is beating them this year.

12-03-2006, 11:43 PM	#82
Eulogy huh Posts: 62,361	uhhh what's with the ref's pants in the NFL? have they been like this all year?

12-03-2006, 11:44 PM	#84
Trotskilicious Banned Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship. Posts: 39,602	i wonder if anyone in michigan would be arguing on behalf of an ohio state berth in the NC had michigan won that game.

12-03-2006, 11:45 PM	#85
Eulogy huh Posts: 62,361	The way the Big Ten jacks off all over itself makes me think they might.

12-03-2006, 11:48 PM	#86
Tchocky Minion of Satan Location: Wher I en nd yu begn Posts: 6,996	You're implying that the regular season is essentially a playoffs. I disagree, and your take on the season is one of the reasons I think there should be a playoff system. I think that if we're going to have a "you had your turn, let someone else try" system, then there should be something at least a little more substantial to it than what we've got, which is just poll averages and strength of schedule crap, both of which are subjective. The two best teams should play for the championship, regardless of whether or not they've already played.

12-03-2006, 11:55 PM	#88
Tchocky Minion of Satan Location: Wher I en nd yu begn Posts: 6,996	You know what? Fine. U of M played a cupcake schedule. There, I said it. And just because Auburn/Tennessee/Georgia>MSU/Wisconsin/Iowa, we should just totally disregard how good Michigan is and put a gimmicky offensive team with no defense in the national title game. You got your wish. Enjoy.