Go Michigan! Besides, I thought you didn't believe in the Devil?

Everyone can forget that Michigan already beat Florida.

Is the Big 1(1)0 the only conference where the teams don't all play one another?

January 9: OSU #1 Mich #2.

Tell me again why Norte Dame is in a BCS bowl.

You said it, Al's Mommy. I guess when Urban Meyer politicks, the BCS listens. Maybe they thought it was time to throw the embittered SEC a bone after stonewalling Auburn's national title bid two years ago.

They thought the Wolverines were better than Florida back in November -- and even though Michigan hasn't played a down of football since Nov. 18, they've decided that they don't think so anymore. They were dazzled by the Gators' work since that date: a seven-point victory over Florida State and a 10-point win over Arkansas. And they decided that Ohio State-Michigan was not in need of a sequel.

That's their story and they're sticking to it. Now if you will excuse them, they'd like to put our fake nose and glasses back on and return to anonymity. These publicized ballots make them more accountable than they'd prefer.

Once again, Florida and the ballot box have made for a wildly controversial combination. Six years ago it was hanging chads. This year the voters are hanging Chad (Henne) out to dry outside the Tostitos BCS National Championship Game.

Some system, huh? You've got to love a sport that reduces its championship to a politicized popularity contest/guessing game.

I really don't have a problem with a Florida-Ohio State title game. In fact, I prefer it to Ohio State-Michigan -- prefer to see a battle of conference champs, and prefer not to put the Buckeyes in double jeopardy against a team they've already beaten.

But I don't like the way it came about.

On Nov. 26, the Wolverines led the Gators by 86 points in the Harris Poll and 30 points in the USA Today poll. By Sunday morning there had been a 154-point reversal in the Harris poll and a 56-point swing in the USA Today poll.

That was shocking. If you were already predisposed to voting Michigan ahead of Florida, I didn't see enough in that game to merit that kind of turnaround. We certainly didn't see anything from Michigan to merit a demotion, given the fact that the Wolverines weren't playing.

Which makes me suspect that habitual slot voters massaged their ballots simply to block a rematch -- something they should have considered the previous two weeks, it seems.

Tell me again why Norte Dame is in a BCS bowl.

Because they are God's Own Pick (see Kevin Drum's comments about the Devil above).

Tell me again why Notre Dame is in a BCS bowl.

Because they draw. That's the only reason. They played 2 good teams all year and got shellacked in both. The system is broken and in need of a fix.

Everyone can forget that Michigan already beat Florida.

Really? I could have sworn that Florida's only loss was on the road to Auburn (and they got jobbed by the refs). In fact, I'm pretty sure of it.

While it's hard to see why UM should be penalized for losing only one game, by 3, on the road, to the alledged best team in the country, but it's also hard to argue against the Gators.

So who would you have put in the title game had Florida lost to two-loss Arkansas?

Am I the only person in the world who thinks the BCS system worked great this year? It was probably the most exciting regular season since I've started watching college football and I can't disagree with the result.

I just don't get this year's controversy.

In 2003, USC had a legitimate beef because it never had a chance to prove it was better than LSU or oklahoma.

Ditto for Auburn in 2004.

But Michigan did have a chance. Nov. 18. And they blew it.

Michigan fans: You knew darn well that Nov. 18's game was an elimination game. And you're going to the Rose Bowl without winning your conference. Be happy.

this BCS setup really has exposed the hypocracy of the pollsters. they all got sucked into the hype around/after the OSU-Mich game on 11/18 and drank the "it was the best game of the century lets have a rematch koolaid."

i was thinking, how could it have been the best game of the century with that much offense put up against two supposedly great defenses? doesn't the Big 10 play defense anymore? to me, it just exposed each team's weaknesses.

i don't know why anyone left Mich at 2 after that game. if Mich had dropped the same number of slots that the losing team usually does in the polls (4 or 5) then we wouldn't be having this debate.

i think Florida should be playing, i think they're a better team than Mich.

I don't normally cheer for USC, but this year I'll make an exception. Go Trojans!

Alex Parker:But Michigan did have a chance. Nov. 18. And they blew it.

Michigan fans: You knew darn well that Nov. 18's game was an elimination game. And you're going to the Rose Bowl without winning your conference. Be happy.

this may be one of the most sane things i've read in the last week regarding the potential BCS NC game (even before USC crapped out).

I'm a Gator fan, so understand the context of what I'm saying here: why do people need these championships and some finality to their questions about who's best? This is college football.

In a better, fairer world, Florida plays Michigan for the right to play Ohio State.

But that's not the world we live in.

Florida had a harder schedule - somehow they stumbled to 12-1 - so they get in. Michigan had their chance.

Yes, they're probably the better team.
Yes, Ohio State will probably wipe the field with Florida.

But.

It's college football - you never know. Just ask USC fans. (Thanks, Bruins!)

Oh, and GO GATORS!!!

Who should be in the BCS instead of Notre Dame this year? Here's how the rankings go:

1. Ohio State, Big Ten champ, automatic bid
2. Florida, SEC champ, automatic bid
3. Michigan, at-large, but automatic because of #3 ranking
4. LSU, at large
5. USC, Pac-10 champ, automatic bid
6. Louisville, Big East champ, automatic bid
7. Wisconsin, ineligible because a maximum of two teams per conference
8. Boise State, automatic because of top 8 finish as team from minor conference
9. Auburn, inelgible for same reason as Wisconsin
10. Oklahoma, Big XII champ, automatic bid
11. Notre Dame, at large
12. Arkansas, ineligible for same reason as Auburn/Wisconsin
13. West Virginia, not offered a bid
14. Wake Forest, ACC champ, automatic bid

Of the ten bids, six were guaranteed to conference champs, and two were made automatic (Michigan and Boise) by virtue of BCS rules regaring rankings. Only schools ranked in the top 14 are eligible for a BCS at-large bid. LSU and Notre Dame were the highest-ranked eligible at-large teams and they received the two available bids. Where's the controversy?

Accordingly, the question is whether Notre Dame is more deserving than West Virginia. ND (10/11) is ranked higher than WVU (12/12)in the human polls. The computers like ND (#8) much more than WVU (#15). ND's two losses were to #3 Michigan and #5 USC. WVU lost to #6 Louisville and to South Florida, which is not among the 38 teams assigned a BCS ranking. West Virginia's only win against the 38 teams with a BCS ranking was at home against #16 Rutgers. ND won against #26 Penn State and at #28 Georgia Tech. Sagarin ranks ND's schedule #20 and WVU's #42.

If you want to argue that the BCS rules (and this year the target seems to me the two-per-conference rule) that's fine, but it's a different argument. If you want to make a reality-based argument about how ND was shown favoritism, you'll have to explain why WVU was more deserving of the bid. It's literally the only way it could have gone differently.

Michigan fans: You knew darn well that Nov. 18's game was an elimination game. And you're going to the Rose Bowl without winning your conference. Be happy.

Oh really? On one says that when two teams in the NFL play each other during the regular season and again in the playoffs. It's the playoff games (or bowl games) that count.

Also, the Florida-Arkansas was the sloppiest football game I've ever seen. I'm going to be laughing my ass of when the Buckeyes kick the shit out of the Gators!

Not that it will shut up the SEC fans. Nothing could shut them up.

It's also going to be fun watching the Wolverines clean up the Used Trojans.

The conventional wisdom seems to be that the championship game should have these characteristics:

- participants need be conference champs
- no rematches of regular season games
- be fair to Ohio State.

So, we should see all the sports media talking about how great the BCS system is to allow such an aesthetic matchup and how a playoff system would just take the human touch out of the game. Does anyone have links to such articles?

Riesz:

Exactly.

Either you have a playoff system and the regular season games don't matter so much.

or you have an enhanced regular season model and the regular season matchups matter a whole lot.

I like having a system where the regular season games feel like do-or-die playoff games.

The system still needs to be fixed to avoid fiascos like the 2003 and 2004 season. But I don't mind the result of this season so much.

People need to remember that bowl games are all about drawing the biggest crowds and TV ratings, not about matching the best teams. That's why Notre Dame is in a BCS bowl this and just about every other year...because they are one of the most popular teams in the country and generate huge amounts of revenue.

As to the other issues, what the BCS needs to do is to add a rule that you must win your conference to play in the national title game...that would have knocked Michigan out of consideration as soon as they lost to Ohio St.

Of course an easier solution would be to institute a playoff system. This would be a lot easier to do than people think.

In a ten-team plyoff, the champions of the six major conferences automatically get spots in the quarterfinals. Notre Dame and the champions of the WAC, Mountain West, and Conference USA play off for the final two quarterfinal spots. Under this system, you would only need nine bowl games to determine a national champion.

If you wanted a more expansive system, you could have a sixteen team playoff which would include the top two teams from each of the six major conferences plus the champions of the WAC, Mountain West, Conference USA, and Notre Dame. This would require fifteen games to determine a national champion.

Under my first proposal, you would have Notre Dame, Bosie St., Houston, and BYU playing in, with USC, Ohio St., Florida, Oklahoma, Wake Forest, and Louisville getting the automatic quarterfinal spots as conference champions.

Under my second proposal, Michigan, Cal, Nebraska, Georgia Tech, Arkansas, and West Virginia would also get into the playoff.

Either way, structuring a reasonable playoff system would not be difficult if the NCAA really wanted to have one.

Here's my solution: the BCS +5 Playoff

Simply expand the BCS from 10 teams to 12, and add 4 playoff games between the BCS bowls/bowl season and the (currently mythical) national championship game.

Keep the BCS, BCS bowls, and all the other bowls, but modify it into a 12-team playoff, with just 5 additional playoff games after the New Year's bowls (and actual a net of just 4 additional games). Right now 10 teams go to 5 bowl games based out of the 4 BCS bowls (with the bogus mythical nat'l champ game being a 2nd game for one of the BCS bowls on a rotating basis). There is talk of going to a +1 playoff format, where the top 2 BCS bowl winners meet in a nat'l champ game. But that would likely require either going back to 8 BCS teams (very unlikely for political reasons) or adding a 5th BCS bowl. Doing the latter wouldn't hurt the BCS revenues one iota, the original 4 BCS bowls could still keep to themselves the final champ game on a rotating basis and the new 5th BCS bowl could have a separately negotiated TV contract if they were worried about it diluting their existing TV contract.

For that reason expanding to a 6th BCS bowl and 12 BCS teams won't hurt the existing BCS bowls and would provide an excellent 12-team playoff that preserves all the bowls, includes virtually every team that has a legitimate claim to being the best, doesn't interfere with finals week, and only strenghtens the existing BCS bowls and revenues. It also provides a better chance of including deserving minor conference teams. Plus if you drop the limit of 2 teams per conference down to 3, it should take away the criticism that a potential actual best team (such as Wisconsin or LSU/Auburn) gets frozen out if a conference is very top heavy.

Round One: Add 2 BCS bowls, choose 12 teams using the BCS, and play the BCS bowl games during the New Year's holidays, just as always. They can seed them 1-12, or follow the traditional format of the Big 10 (sic) and Pac 10 champs meeting in the Rose and each of the other 4 bowls hosting a conference champ, then seeding the 6 wildcards based on rankings. Keeps all the existing bowls, doesn't have to change the number of bowls, number of bowl teams, or the bowl season at all. They can move up 1 existing bowl and create a new BCS bowl (perhaps in the new Dallas Cowboys' retractible roof stadium in Dallas) or move up 2 existing bowls and add a replacement minor bowl. So all the coaches, schools, conferences, and bowls are happy and don't lose anything.

Round Two: At least a full week after the BCS bowls, give the highest-ranked two winners a bye, and have the #3 & #4 ranked winners host campus home games against #6 & #5 winners.

Round 3: The Final Four, have the bye teams hosting campus home games.

Round Four: The actual national championship game is played in a BCS bowl, rotated among the original 4 BCS bowls, just as it is now.

With 12 BCS teams you get 6 conference champs and 6 wildcards, guaranteeing that even in the worst case the top 6 teams will get into the playoff, and most likely the top 9 or 10 teams, or even all 12 if there are no upsets. It is virtually certain that the actual best team in the country will be in the top 9 or 10 BCS rankings at the end of the year, as opposed to many years where the actual best team doesn't make the BCS top 2 or the #1-ranked team loses their bowl (which by nature suggests that the polls were wrong and thus may have been wrong about who the actual top 2 teams were).

In that format no school hosts more than 1 playoff game. The existing BCS bowls (and all the other bowls) keep as many games as they have now, with no watering down of the BCS bowls but rather a strengthening since all of them now matter. With no more than 2 games per weekend after the New Year's bowls there shouldn't be any interference with the NFL playoffs. All the traditions remain and the regular season and conference championships still matter (6 wildcards isn't many, especially since 1 or even 2 slots will often go to a minor conference teams, and they could add a rule that only conference champs can host a playoff game). And the crowned champ has to beat ON THE FIELD 3 or 4 legitimate playoff teams, rather than posing, campaigning, and/or riding an overrated conference's reputation or legacy high initial poll ranking to a 1-game crap shoot. In reality, this playoff system only adds a net of 4 extra games to what exists now. Just 4 additional games, all in January, so the university presidents' objections are shown to be completely bogus.

12 teams in a playoff assures that the resulting champion really is the best in the country. And in the process changes the final game from a fraudulent bogus mythical faux-championship that is nothing more than a figure-skating exhibition between 2 beauty contest winners into a legitimate title game.

Not as perfect as a 16-team playoff, but far more feasible and politically doable. In fact, if the will is there, this could be done in the next few months, or a year at most. They chose to add a 5th bowl and went to 10 teams in between seasons, so the precedent is there. The Cotton and a Florida bowl (and others) would be beating down the BCS doors to step up and be the 5th and 6th bowls. It is time to institute a playoff, and there are ZERO good excuses for not doing so.

Michigan fans: You knew darn well that Nov. 18's game was an elimination game. And you're going to the Rose Bowl without winning your conference. Be happy.

So I suppose that Florida fans would have no problem moving the national championship game to Columbus, right? I mean, if it was a fair and even shot for Michigan to play OSU in an "elimination game" at OSU's home stadium, then I'm sure Florida fans wouldn't have any problem with the final "elimination game" being played their as well, right?

Hypocrites.

I don't see why a playoff system is OK for Div I-AA and Div II but not for Div I. The reasons put forth (too much time away from classes? Gimme a break) are specious.

To quote or paraphrase somebody, "It's all about the Benjamins."

Matt Warburg,

A 16-team playoff would be perfect -- 12 is probably the most realistic place to start though -- you know what they say about great minds thinking alike ; )

"On Nov. 26, the Wolverines led the Gators by 86 points in the Harris Poll and 30 points in the USA Today poll. By Sunday morning there had been a 154-point reversal in the Harris poll and a 56-point swing in the USA Today poll.

That was shocking."

The only shocking part was that Michigan actually
remained at #2 after losing. That almost never happens, particularly when the losing team never
even mounted a credible run at winning the game.
Everthing since has been perfectly logical and
predictable, namely that:

- USC beat the crap out Notre Dame (matching Michigan's best win of the season) and thus predictably made up the small polling deficit they had to Michigan

- then Florida beat the crap out of a quality team (imo, again a win that at least matched Michigan's season- best) and thus predictably made up another smalish polling deficit.

Where's the shocking part? I keep hearing "they shouldn't penalize Michigan for not playing"..they didn't. They evaluated new information as it happened.

Go Deacs!

And while were bashing the NCAA, does anybody else find it ridiculous that there are 32 bowl games this year???? That means that 64 teams are playing in a bowl game, which is over half of all Division I-A schools.

Not suprisingly, there are seven teams going to bowl games with a 6-6 record, including the Indepedence Bowl which is between two 6-6 teams. Has there ever been a bowl game before when neither team has had a winning record?

Add to that another fourteen teams which finished at 7-5, and you've got twenty-one bowl teams that didn't even win 8 games.

How about tightening the bowl eligibility rules so that teams must have at least eight wins against division I-A schools and no more than three losses to be bowl-eligible.

spock's first comment was ripped off word for word from espn.com

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=2685389

unless spock IS pat forde, this is pretty blatant plagiarism.

Not "word for word".

I'm kinda on the fence about the whole BCS/playoff debate. But let me give you the reasons why I'm wary of any playoff system, even a simple plus-one:

1) Diminishes the regular season. I know this is an old cliche. But right now we have a thrilling regular season. Add a playoff, and you'll see a lot of formerly interesting games relegated to the non-starters.

2) Diminishes the rivalries. Sort of an addition to rule 1. But games like Mich-ND, ND-USC, ohio st.-Mich are heated because the stakes are quite high. Go to a playoff and the stakes are diminished, and will be replaced by a rotating set of playoff rivalries that won't quite produce the same passion. Now, the presence of heated rivalries in NCAA basketball is good evidence against this argument. But, not to beat a dead horse, but the game between Michigan and ohio state is supposed to be THE GAME which decides who's better, Michigan or ohio state.

3) Preserve the bowl system. Right now, I think the bowls are pretty fun. I really can't stand the thought of the sports chattering classes blathering on about what this bowl game means for the playoff, what that bowl means, etc. I like them being the destination of the season, not a stop along the way. There are 119 teams in Division 1. Most of them have almost no chance at all for the championship. Bowl games give them all something to work for.

4) Injuries. Playoffs aren't the indisputable title system in other divisions of college football because so many key players end up injured. Playing 16 consecutive games is tough for the pros, let alone college athletes. Why stretch the playing time so much?

5) Just as complicated, just as controversial. You think a playoff will diminish the controversy? Under the two proposals suggested above, Michigan wouldn't be playing in the playoff. I'm sure that would go over JUST FINE in the Midwest.

Those are just some of the reasons, and after looking them over I'm not 100 percent sure they're convincing. But for now, I want to stick with the devil I know.

"I've always figured the BCS should match the two best teams from different conferences. So putting USC's last minute meltdown to one side, the BCS turned out just the way it should have this year, matching Ohio State against Florida rather than mounting an all-Big 10 rematch."

Sure, but that's not what the BCS actually does. If someone thinks certain things should be illegal, it doesn't mean that it's okay to deprive someone of that thing without, you know, making it illegal.

"It's the only way we'll ever know if Ohio State and the Big 10 are really as good as everyone thinks."

Yea, because those Texas and Notre Dame games didn't mean anything. But let's look at the big nonconference games that the SEC teams played - USC just CRUSHED Arkansas, and Florida managed to eke out a win against a really, really, really bad Florida State team.

"then Florida beat the crap out of a quality team (imo, again a win that at least matched Michigan's season- best) and thus predictably made up another smalish polling deficit."

Really? Was that the Florida State game that was won 21-14? Because in the Arkansas game, played in front of a mostly home atmosphere, I watched Florida win a game by 10 in which they were gifted 14 points (the punt block and the fumble-on-the-five), with another interception in the end zone at the end of the game for a ball that probably doesn't get thrown if Arkansas is down by less than two scores. Even though, you know, that the same Arkansas team played with their all-everything RB, whose the only reason that they're there, at 50%

If you wanted to see what "beat the crap" looks like, Arkansas edition, you may want to look at the USC game. Then realize that the same USC team didn't do nearly as much to Notre Dame at home as Michigan did to Notre Dame on the road.

Most playoff teams have home-court advantage in them too. I still don't buy it, Vladi.

Mr. Parker above gave some excellent commentary on why he does not favor a playoff system at BCS level of college football.

IMO, there will never be a playoff at highest level, and the main reason is that coaches don't want one. The way it is now, at least 25 or so programs are able to end season with a win. In any playoff, even just a 4 team one, that number of teams ending season with a win will drop.

Alex Parker,that is the most illogical argument you've ever made. Florida gets to play Ohio State on a neutral field instead of Ohio State's mudfield is fairer to them than it was to Michigan because....ummm....I don't get it. I mean, I don't think it was a real assertion, but simply proof that "Michigan had its shot" and now "its Florida's turn" isn't exactly correct, even if its also completely irrelevant under the BCS.

My solution: Recognize that big-time college football is a farm system for the NFL. Let the NFL pay for all big-time college football and stop the pretense that the players are students. Then let NFL scouts decide who plays in what post-season games.

Those colleges where the players are students can play post season games based on the winner of this conference playing the winner of that conference.

Michigan's game against Ohio State was a playoff game, but Florida's game against Auburn was an exhibition game. Got it.

LOL, Justin -- I wish they would tell us these things BEFORE the games are played ; )

Justin, you don't know me. How could you possibly know that's the most illogical argument I've ever made?

Believe me, I've made arguments much less logical.

All I'm saying is that in a playoff system, home-court advantage is just something you have to deal with. In the NFL, the better team earns it. In this case, it was just random chance.

Either way, I don't see the fact that you played on the other team's home turf means that you deserve another shot.

And championship games are always on neutral ground.

And as for your second point, fair enough. But Florida won its conference. Michigan didn't.

i'm a big 10 fan, but i have to agree with the Florida pick, even if it came about dishonestly. Michigan's schedule was not very tough - only one real quality win (Wisconsin doesn't count because 1) the Badgers were barely ranked at the time, and 2) UM were being played to a standstill until near the end of the 3rd, when UW went into a shell). Florida, otoh, had 2 top 10 wins and i agree with the comment above that Auburn is hardest place to not get jobbed by the refs. LSU can testify to that.

Both Florida and Michigan played Vanderbilt. How did the results compare? Michigan won easily and played its backups. Florida ... ?

I think I preferred the old bowl system. Lots of good college football games with long standing inter-conference rivals.

A 16-team playoff would be perfect -- 12 is probably the most realistic place to start though -- you know what they say about great minds thinking alike ; )

Except you can't have a 12-team playoff, unless you factor in a bye for the top 4 teams. With 12 teams, you would get down to a 3-yeam semi-final. Not that a bye is the worst idea, but it is not cutting down the number of rounds teams have to play.

Using the current bowl structure, the best you could do is an 8-team playoff, with the semi's being played New Year's Day, and the final a week later.

Who should be in the BCS instead of Notre Dame this year?

Excellent analogy, John, I wasn't aware of the "two teams per conference" rule. Thanks for setting me straight.

The way it is now, at least 25 or so programs are able to end season with a win. In any playoff, even just a 4 team one, that number of teams ending season with a win will drop.

I disagree. If you institute a playoff system into the current bowl structure, it doesn't prevent lower-ranked teams playing in lower-rated bowls. Keep the bowl structure, have the top 8 teams fight it out in the BCS bowl system.

It won't end the arguments, though. Instead of the "#3 Michigan should be in the Championship game" argument, you get "Auburn should have been in the playoff ahead of Boise St."

And championship games are always on neutral ground.

Unless you're Miami playing in the Orange Bowl, or *gasp* USC playing in the Rose. But I digress.

Paperpusher -

"Michigan's schedule was not very tough - only one real quality win (Wisconsin doesn't count because 1) the Badgers were barely ranked at the time, and 2) UM were being played to a standstill until near the end of the 3rd, when UW went into a shell)."

The fact that it took until later in the season for the polls to recognize the quality of Wisconsin's team counts *against* Michigan?!? The problem here is with pre-season and early-season polls, which have a hard time identifying 'improved from last year' teams like Wisconsin, and 'vastly improved teams from last year', like Rutgers and Wake Forest (as well as 'vastly over-rated' teams on the verge of meltdown).

Under your way of thinking, an early season win over Miami, for example, counts for more now than one over Wisconsin because Mimai was ranked at the time, but isn't now?!? That's just nuts.

At this point in the season when we have a much better idea of what's what, and who's good and who isn't, Michigan's win over is Wisconsin is at least the equal of anything on the Florida resume. (And their win over MAC champion Central Michigan is bad either. But I guess that doesn't count, because at the point they played, Central Michigan had not yet won the MAC.)

AGAIN, you overlook heartland football, Kevin; again, you overlook OU, this time coach Bob Stoops,

OU was at least as down in the dumps as Florida when Stoops got there.

And what has he done? **WON** one BCS title, played for another, and won four Big 12 titles. Urban Meyer can't hold an effing candle to that.

Jeez, Kevin, learn something about college football.

MeLoseBrain,

USC's last two Rose Bowl trips were entirely forgettable -- USC (at 31 appearances) and Michigan (at 20 appearances) have played in the most Rose Bowls, and not surprisingly, have played each other the most times (this will be their 10th Rose Bowl meeting, USC currently leads (5-2, (5-4 overall)). Go Wolverines!!!

Robert Earle,

You mean "vastly over-rated teams on the verge of meltdown" like USC? Go Wolverines!!!

SocraticGadfly,

Kevin Drum only knows about ONE college footbal team (the one that's going to get their asses kicked in the Rose Bowl New Year's Day). Go Wolverines!!!

So you thnk Pete Carroll and Urban Meyer were standing at the cross roads trying to hitch a ride and singing the blues with Robert Johnson, is that it Kevin?

More Rose Bowl Trivia:

Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the 1942 game was moved to Duke University's Wallace Wade Stadium in Durham, North Carolina due to World War II security threats, as officials were wary of allowing such a large crowd to congregate anywhere on the West Coast and risking another Japanese attack.

As a Michigan fan (and alum) I can truthfully say I did not consider the Nov. 18 game an elimination game. I did, however, figure that both USC and Florida would have to lose for us to gain redeption.

I don't think Michigan got jobbed. I do thing that things being equal (UM had the better loss, Fla the better schedule) voters opted against the rematch.

How, oh how could I ever forget the M in redemption? Please don't tell the Alumni Association.

My ideal playoff would be one in which the first round games are home games for the top-seeded teams and then the later rounds are warm weather neutral "bowl" sites. Think about say a 16 team tourney where the top-8 seeds earn an additional home playoff game at the end of the season. What a reward for the local fans who can't afford to take off and travel during the holidays to a game 3000 miles away during the busiest and most expensive travel time of the year. And that dispenses with the money issue as a reason to stick with the bowls.

In addition, what football is missing that basketball has in droves is the "cinderella team" phenomena. Half of what makes the NCAA basketball tourney great is that every year we get some new cinderella team going deep into the tourney by upsetting someone big. Imagine how cool it would be to see an upstart like Boise State travel to a place like Michigan or Florida and steal a December game at the Big House or Swamp. Now that would be an upset for the ages. I love that sort of thing. The current system is just way too scripted.

Finally regarding Notre Dame. Any team that schedules all 3 service academies every year doesn't deserve serious consideration. Show me any BCS conference where 3 teams picked at random are as easy as the 3 service academies. Go ahead. Pick 3 SEC teams at random and see how those 3 compare to the 3 service academies. Yes Notre Dame scheduled Michigan and USC and got spanked by both. But the remainder of their schedule was easier than any other BCS conference. Ask Miami, Florida State, Virginia Tech, and Penn State whether it was easier to stay on top of the world as an independent or in a BCS conference. Way back in the old days when there were lots of football independents things were different. But today with only Army, Navy, and Temple as the other Div I independents it's past time for Notre Dame to join the Big 10 where it belongs. Then we'll see how good they really are year-in and year-out.

Go Navy!!!!! Beat Army!

USC's last two Rose Bowl trips were entirely forgettable

Huh?

I seem to remember a pretty good Rose Bowl game last year: Reggie Bush vs Vince Young. Undefeated USC vs Undefeated Texas. Final score: USC 38, Texas 41.

The BCS is obviously flawed.

Both the Harris and USA Today polls are over-weighted with Democrats.

Go Blue!

The SEC has great athletes, probably the best in the nation, but until they develop QBs like Troy Smith or Chad Henne, their conference will always be a pool for running backs and line backers and nothing more...

By the way, Vegas had Florida as 6 point dogs against UofM on a neutral field.

Rose Bowl will be awesome this year. A throwback game. USC-Michigan!

We almost did have a neat little Cinderella story, with Rutgers almost making it to the title game.

We also have Wake Forest playing in a BCS game.

But overall, you're right: that's one argument for a playoff system. Cinderella stories happen in the BCS, but they take longer--it took Louisville several years and a change in conference to get serious consideration. But this year, it came within a few points of playing in the title game.

However, as an Indiana native, I'm kinda wary of that argument. Every Hoosier screamed bloody murder when they went to a class system for high school basketball, like an athletic system should be designed around what happened once in 1954.

Sorry, Kent; I meant the last two USC-Michigan Rose Bowl match ups -- I agree that the last USC-Texas match up was spectacular -- although I'm sure Kevin would rather forget it ; )

The SEC has great athletes, probably the best in the nation, but until they develop QBs like Troy Smith or Chad Henne, their conference will always be a pool for running backs and line backers and nothing more...

You mean like Peyton Manning?

The only way to eliminate all the subjectivity is to turn the entire D-I conference system into a playoff. By which I mean: elevate all D-I conferences to major status, play an 8-game all-conference schedule, and then take the top 8 teams from each conference and scatter them across a 64-team bracket such that no two conference teams can meet again until the round of 8.

This year's regular season lasted 14 weeks. In that time, you could spend 9 weeks on the 8-game conference season, including a bye week, and spend 5 weeks eliminating all but the last 4 teams from a playoff. Then you get your Final 4 type championship in January (and heck, why not play a consolation game too?), and all the other teams are eligible for traditional bowl matchups.

We've seen what Michigan can do against OSU: lose. There was never a time in that game when OSU was not in control: 10 points off two botched snaps made it seem closer than it was.

ND is in a BCS bowl because they're a guaranteed TV draw. And that's not just because of the subway alums: how many of you will be watching just to seem them get their asses kicked (at a "neutral site," incidentally)?

Kent: Major-conference teams worse than the service academies? Northwestern, Indiana, Illinois. Every year? Army is the anomaly in this year's ND schedule (the last meetings were in 1998 and 1995; both close games, BTW). Navy's been a constant since 1928 (the story/legend is that they remain on the schedule in gratitude for the Navy's making ND an ROTC center in WWII, which kept all-male ND's doors open through the war). Air Force has been a semiregular on ND's schedule for the last 30 years or so; the last three meetings before this year were very close games.

But overall, you're right: that's one argument for a playoff system. Cinderella stories happen in the BCS, but they take longer--it took Louisville several years and a change in conference to get serious consideration. But this year, it came within a few points of playing in the title game.

Well, I'd hardly argue that Louisville is a cinderella team this year. They've been in the top-10 most of the year unless I'm very mistaken. Back when they were a Conference USA team things were a little different.

I do agree that upsets and cinderella teams are not the sole reason to design a particular system. Indiana highschool basketball was certainly correct to go to a division format to add some fairness.

I'm just saying that the story line is always a whole lot more interesting when teams have a chance to come in and mess up the script. That's true in any sport and at any level. The underdog stories like the Miracle on Ice are what makes sports great.

Agreed. Go Butler!

Here's an interesting scenario that hasn't gotten much thought: if Florida beats the Buckeyes in the nat'l title game and Michigan creams USC, there might be quite a few people who will decide that Michigan is the best in the country.

Is another split title possible? And if so, does it matter?

After all, there's nothing that the BCS can do if a bunch of people want to get together and say that some other team is the best team that year. Under the old system, it happened all the time. And every sportswriter in the world seems convinced that the St. Louis Cardinals weren't really the best team in baseball.

"You mean like Peyton Manning?"

On the Big Ten side, one would say "Or like Tom Brady, Drew Breeze, Brian Griese, Trent Green, even Bob Griese (but Chad Heene?)"

On the SEC side, one would mention Jay Cutler, Rex Grossman (OK, maybe not those guys, but...) Bart Starr, Joe Namath (and, not being an SEC guy, probably a dozen others)"

Now if some of those names are 'too old' for you, and you want to stick to the 90's and the '00s, both the Big Ten and the SEC are gonna lose this one to the PAC 10 and the MAC.

Kent: Major-conference teams worse than the service academies? Northwestern, Indiana, Illinois.

No, I'm saying 3 teams picked AT RANDOM from any major conference. If you draw 3 Big-10 teams out of the hat you are not going to get Northwestern, Indiana and Illinois. Let's do a test. We'll assign numbers 1-11 to the Big-10 teams based on alphabetical order and then use a random number generator from www.random.org to pick 3 Big-10 teams at random. Doing that I get 9,3,8 as the first 3 random numbers selected from 11 which equates to ....

Penn St
Iowa
Ohio St

Tell me that playing the 3 service academies is the same as 3 Big-10 teams picked at random. Want me to do it again? OK, on the 2nd try I get 11,3, and 6. That equates to:

Wisconsin
Iowa
Minn.

Using the same 3 random numbers for the SEC we would get:

Auburn,
Mississippi St
Mississippi from the first draw, and

Auburn
Tennessee
Kentucky

from the 2nd draw.

Yep, playing the 3 service academies is definitely toughter than any of those four groups of randomly selected Big-10 or SEC teams.

There was never a time in that game when OSU was not in control: 10 points off two botched snaps made it seem closer than it was.

Why does this imaginary replay of the game always let only OSU take back 2 dumb mistakes? How about, OSU gets 2 perfect snaps and Michigan gets proper shoes and no late hit on Smith?

Per comments I sent to Kevin, the only deal Urban Meyer made with the devil was to get so much Keth Jackson-type publicity.

Urban Meyer isn't even one of the finalists for Coach of the Year, but the man coaching a team that Kevin likes to think is always overrated, apparently is: Bob Stoops of Oklahoma.

I know Michigan would beat Florida, and believe Oklahoma would too.

Stop overrating the SEC, Kevin, and definitely stop underrating the Big 12.

True, one can't take back the mistakes. The point is that if OSU merely retains possession on those two routine plays, it's a 2-TD game, and most of this string is moot. Michigan had the ball exactly once in the second half with a chance to take the lead, and they went nowhere. No do-overs.

SocraticGadfly: Stop overrating the SEC, Kevin, and definitely stop underrating the Big 12.

You said it, Soc. Go big 12. SEC sucks!

I'm sick of hearing those SEC announcers bragging all the time. It's going to be fun watching the SEC get their asses handed to them this January!

The BCS system is kinda based on faith that throughout the year, two teams will emerge as clearly the best.

Last year, it worked like a charm, and we got a great matchup--USC v. Texas.

This year, it would have worked great, except that Michigan and Ohio State are in the same conference and played each other. No other teams stayed unbeaten.

In this case, I'd argue that Michigan and Florida both played tough schedules and had plenty of "quality" wins. Ultimately, the edge should go to the conference champ, no?

In the future, clearly, the BCS needs some better way to decide ties. I'd start with a rule preventing two teams from the same conference playing in the championship game.

That wouldn't have fixed the 2003 and 2004 seasons, though. I'm open to suggestions about that one.

But the best argument for the BCS that I can think of is, what other system produces more arguing and procrastination? I'll sure miss it if they do go back to the old ways or come up with something different.

Speaking of which, shouldn't we be seeing some articles raging against/defending the BCS about now on the nerdy political sites that Drum readers frequent? Where's Jonathan Chait when you need him?

It's also probably worth pointing out that ND acheduled four teams from the Big Ten this year, instead of their usual three. All four were undefeated going into their ND game (nice nonconference scheduling, guys). How many were still undefeated afterward? And none of them were on my list of three. Tough conference!

I bet Diebold is behind this!

I bet Diebold is behind this!

Diebold is headquartered in....Ohio.

Yep!

"definitely stop underrating the Big 12"

Did any Big 12 team have a remotely significant non-conference win this year? On par with Ohio State crushing Texas or Michigan or USC crushing Notre Dame?

That almost never happens, particularly when the losing team never
even mounted a credible run at winning the game.

What game were you watching? Michigan was in it until the end. They were one missed tackle away from winning that game.

And they're going to beat USC like a drum.

Get a playoff - decide it on the field.

Just curious.

Does anyone else do like me and root for the BCS to fail?

I'm an Oregon fan so I didn't have a dog in the hunt the final weeks of the season this year. So I was happily scheming out all the ways that the BCS could end up with a complete and total embarrasing mess on its hands and root for the particular combinations of wins and losses that would create that outcome. Probably the worst case scenario for the BCS would be to end up with a large number of 11-1 teams at the end of the year and no undefeated teams. Especially when you have a daisy-chain of teams that beat each other creating no obvious favorite.

I keep rooting for the worst BCS outcome in the hopes that they'll be embarrased enough to give us a playof. But then again, these folks seem beyond embarrasment so that's probably futile.

In any event, in my book one of the worst but least discussed outcomes of the BCS is how it has killed the rest of the bowl games. These days the remaining non-Championship BCS games seem mostly selected at random. All the old conference matchups are long gone. Instead we get Boise St vs Oklahoma in the Fiesta and Louisville vs Wake Forest in the Orange. Whoop de doo. LSU vs Notre Dame in the Sugar looks interesting only because I want to see Notre Dame embarrased. Only the Rose Bowl with USC vs Michigan seems worth scheduling for a party.

Pay attention, everyone. At 4:58, Kent explained why ND is in a BCS game. He has no rooting interest ... except wanting to see ND get embarrassed. Any other schools like that in the NCAA?

To follow up.

If Texas had beat OSU, USC had beat UCLA, LSU beat Auburn, Wake Forest beat Clemson, Rutgers beat West Virgina, and Oklahoma had beat Oregon (some argue that they did) then we would have had a total of ten BCS conference teams with identical 11-1 records with almost all the losses coming against other 11-1 teams..

Imagine the total meltdown of the system under THAT scenario!

I am a Michigan alum (as is my eldest daughter)and a fairly rabid Wisconsin fan (not my eldest daughter, she bleeds maize and blue). While I am disappointed that Michigan will not have a chance to play for the national title and that Wisconsin is barred from a BCS game (without having even had a shot at OSU), I do think that the way the bowls are set up could be very good for the Big Ten (or very bad if Michigan, OSU and Wisconsin fall on their face, but I think that is unlikely). If OSU wins convincingly--say more than 14 points and Michigan does likewise, they will end up 1 and 2 in the final polls and everyone will say that they should have played each other again. If they had played each other again, one of them would likely fall to 4th or 5th and the whiners from the SEC would argue that the Big Ten was overated all year. Now to round out the picture, Wisconsin will have to take it to Arkansas. I can only hope that Arkansas special teams do not improve. If that happens Wisconsin would be in the top 5 as well and there should be no question about what conference was tops this year.

Pay attention, everyone. At 4:58, Kent explained why ND is in a BCS game. He has no rooting interest ... except wanting to see ND get embarrassed. Any other schools like that in the NCAA?

Yeah well, I hate the Dallas Cowboys and Yankees too, ever since childhood. Doesn't mean I want to see those teams in the Super Bowl or World Series.

As for other teams I love to hate? For me it would be USC, Miami, and Florida State.

In any event, anyone who thinks being an independent is harder than playing in a conference should ask Miami and Florida State both at 3-5 in the ACC this year if playing in a conference is easier than picking your opponents each year as an independent.

A lot of college football fans across the country are fed up with the Bowl Championship Series. Most people agree that something need to done, but don't know where to start. I am launching an online campaign to pressure the NCAA to Sack the BCS.

If fans join together, we can pressure the NCAA to finally get rid of the BCS mess. Sign onto our petition here: http://ga4.org/campaign/sackthebcs

With your help, we can get the word out to college football fans about the effort.

What game were you watching? Michigan was in it until the end. They were one missed tackle away from winning that game.

Revisionists like Emartin like to forget the third and fifteen where Michigan gifted the ball back to Ohio State on a personal foul, the same time of personal foul that DIDN'T get called in the U$C-UCLA game. If Crable holds up, Michigan gets the ball down by four with about six minutes to go. That play probably decided the game.

No, I'm saying 3 teams picked AT RANDOM from any major conference.

I'm not sure what the point is of picking them AT RANDOM!! Those are generally the three weakest opponents ND schedules (year in year out there may be exceptions). That trio is better than the three schools Wisconsin faced out of conference, and that's before factoring in conference games against Illinois and Indiana. Michigan routinely schedules a few creampuffs every year. Wisconsin's non-conference schedule is always weak. Florida played a pathetic non-conference schedule this year. Notre Dame generally plays three or four Big Ten schools (usually ones that are historically decent), two or three Pac 10 schools (U$C, Stanford, and this year, UCLA), and recently they've played Tennessee, Nebraska, Georgia Tech, Pitt, Washington, Boston College, Florida State, etc. Their schedule top to bottom stacks up with any team in the country. Maybe they tried to add Central Florida and Western Carolina and were beaten the punch by Florida.

As a Michigan Grad myself ('86, and '88) I'm not surprised that Florida was chosen and they probably deserve a chance to play OSU.

But, the number 1 and number 2 teams are NOT playing in the Fiesta Bowl according to the Las Vegas oddsmakers, as the last odds I could find before the BCS pairings were announced had OSU over Michigan by 3, and OSU over Florida by 8 (some actually had 9). I'll go with the oddsmakers over the coaches and the press because they are putting $$$ on the line.

The coaches and the press are easily swayed by emotions and hype. Last week they were hyping the fact that USC deserved to jump ahead of Michigan because it beat Notre Dame at home. Dooohhhh!!! Oops. Screwed up on that one too.

But, if Michigan doesn't beat USC in the Rose Bowl then I'll have to shut up (even though it is effectively a home game for USC). My biggest gripe is that Florida is not the test for OSU that they should have to pass to remain #1.

By the way, GO OSU!!! DESTROY Florida!!!

I just want everyone to know that AUBURN beat both Florida and Lsu.So who really should be playing Ohio State?

"If Texas had beat OSU, USC had beat UCLA, LSU beat Auburn, Wake Forest beat Clemson, Rutgers beat West Virgina, and Oklahoma had beat Oregon (some argue that they did) then we would have had a total of ten BCS conference teams with identical 11-1 records with almost all the losses coming against other 11-1 teams.."

Part of what made this season so fun for me is that we had about a half-dozen one-loss teams, as well as some Big East contenders, all jockeying for a spot against the winner of the Ohio St/Michigan game.

And then, one by one, in week after week of thrilling football, they all whittled themselves down to Florida.

I guess that's what's befuddling me--I feel like it was almost a miracle that the system worked this time!

But, it only works if you buy my anti-rematch ideology. I'm learning now, most people don't.

Auburn also lost (badly) at home to a team that can't throw.

And the same team that can't throw almost won the conference championship against a team that can't run.

Wow, and to think I was feeling sorry for the Michigan fans. You've proven yourselves to be the whiny, entitled little brats the rest of the Big-10 has always said you were. I'd root for the Trojans, but that would require me to listen to a couple more hours of your whining.
Guess I'll just have to watch the Gators. You know, in the Fiesta Bowl?
Bitches.

Kent, the key phrase in your 4:58 is "LSU vs Notre Dame in the Sugar looks interesting." It's about TV ratings.

Miami and FSU are having lousy years for a large number of reasons, very few of which have to do with playing in conferences. Do you really think that this year's schedule was made only last spring, so that ND could cherry-pick weak sisters like Michigan State and Stanford? The ND schedule consists, year in and year out, of Purdue, Michigan State, Navy, USC, at least one other Big Ten team (over the last couple of decades, usually Michigan), a couple of the semiregulars (e.g., Stanford, Air Force, BC, Pitt, Penn State until they joined the Big Ten; Miami was one of these until things got too ugly in the early 90s), and more rarely scheduled teams from around the country, usually on a home-and-home basis. This year, that group was Army, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and UCLA. In other years, that category has included Washington, Tennessee, Rutgers, Syracuse, BYU, Nebraska, Texas, Texas A&M, Alabama, even Ohio State (once Woody was safely dead). Some years it's a minefield; this year, less so. Remember when people thought they'd start 1-5 last year against Pitt, Michigan, Michigan State, Washington, Purdue, USC?

Does anyone else do like me and root for the BCS to fail?

Yes. I really wanted one of the Big East teams to run the table and get shut out of the national title game by a one loss team from the SEC/Big 12/PAC 10/Big 10 and then have the Big East team win their bowl with the one loss team beating OSU. That would have been the perfect outcome of the season for me. (Although, like you, I really really want to see a season where nobody runs the table and you have five or six teams with a legitimate argument that they should be in the title game. That would be awesome. And it's bound to happen as long as we do things this way)

[i]Wow, and to think I was feeling sorry for the Michigan fans. You've proven yourselves to be the whiny, entitled little brats the rest of the Big-10 has always said you were. I'd root for the Trojans, but that would require me to listen to a couple more hours of your whining.
Guess I'll just have to watch the Gators. You know, in the Fiesta Bowl?
Bitches.[/i]

posted by Cazart.

Sounds like someone didn't get in to the school of their choice.

My condolences and check that website of yours before you call anyone a bitch.

Vladi -

"Wisconsin's non-conference schedule is always weak."

As I pointed out in Kevin's comments a couple weeks ago, Wisconsin was supposed to play Oregon State this year, as the back end of a home-and-home series, but Oregon State pulled out as part of schedule shuffle when they opened the season in one of those Labor Day 'kickoff classic' games against LSU a couple years ago. Wisconsin was also supposed to be getting into a home-and-home against Virginia Tech this year and next (or was it 2007 and 2008?) but that fell through as well. So, yeah, their non-conference schedule was pretty weak this year, but not for lack of trying.

Pretty much every year, Wisconsin has at least one game against another 'BCS conference' team (as well as "trap games" against sometimes pretty decent teams like Frenso, Hawaii, and MAC teams). This year was the exception.

Why don't we have a match-up of Michigan vs. USC in Detroit and see if USC is as good at a less pro-USC venue?

From http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/12/04/bcs.graduation.rates.ap/index.html

ORLANDO, Florida (AP) -- College football teams headed for the five major bowls this year performed better academically on the whole than the national average, according to a study released Monday.

At these top programs, however, the disparity between black and white graduation rates grows by nearly double.

...

Of the 64 teams invited to bowls this year, 86 percent graduated at least half their players.

...

Perhaps most strikingly, white athletes in the Bowl Championship Series -- the top five bowls, including the BCS title game -- beat their counterparts among the 119 NCAA Division I-A schools by graduating 81 percent of the time, compared with 62 percent division-wide. The black athlete graduation rate was 56 percent among those schools, also better than the 49 percent overall rate.

But the discrepancy between white and black players' graduation rates for top bowl teams -- a 25 percentage point difference -- was nearly twice the 13-point divide within the NCAA average.

Unbeaten Ohio State was next-to-last in black academics. The Buckeyes graduated 32 percent of black players, better only than Georgia (24 percent) among the 64 bowl teams. Ohio State has an 80 percent overall graduation rate for athletes, and an 85 percent rate for white football players.

...

Vladi (et al.) -

I decided to look around the internet to see if could back up my claim re Wisconsin vs Oregon State and Virginia Tech. I came up with an article from 2003 in the Wisconsin State Journal (one of Madison's two papers) that not only mentions OSU and VA Tech, but talks about the 2006 scheduling problems that they were having back in 2003. A small window into how they ended up with Buffalo and Western Illinois (and here's a shocker - alot of it comes down to money! Who knew?)

http://www.madison.com/wisconsinstatejournal/sports/56072.php

- Robert

I say...all teams play 8 weeks in conference games, then do playoffs. Just to make all the BCS bs go away.

Oh, and once again, I did call it last weekend.

"Time for Ohio St. to beat another Florida team for the National Championship."

And gooooo Badgers! I'm so proud of them this year. My only affiliation is that I own a badger hat with ears. Easy love.

Oh, and welcome to the Alamo Bowl, Longhorns. I know how much you love visiting San Antonio. Ha ha!

Tell me again why Notre Dame is in a BCS bowl.

Because it's generally the only way you can get people in New York to watch college football.

I was hoping for a Michigan-Ohio State rematch for several reasons:

1. To piss off the SEC, with hopes they would pull out of the BCS and cause all sorts of havoc...maybe leading to a playoff.
2. To tick off the Rose Bowl old-money folks and their insistance on a precious Big Ten-Pac 10 matchup. (And if I hear that godforsaken "granddaddy of them all" line one more time...)

Well, my focus will be on Orlando on Dec. 29, as my Terrapins face Purdue in the Champs Sports Bowl. (Perhaps we'll see those schools face off in the NCAA women's basketball tournament this spring.)

Hey, I'm a Purdue fan. Looking forward to that matchup. Let the best team win.

That also means I'm a ND hater, but honestly I'm tired of arguing about the strength of their schedule and their favoritism and all that. They deserve to get to the Sugar Bowl and get their butts kicked there. Go Tigers!

Speaking of NY, somewhere there was a BCS official drooling all over his Blackberry at the thought of an Ohio St.-Rutgers matchup in the title game. Turns out, the Scarlet Knights weren't worthy, and we didn't need a playoff to figure that out.

In order to strenghthen their schedule, next year ND will play SEC powers South Carolina, Kentucky and Ole Miss on the road.

Here is why the BCS is so screwed up.

I am a rabid Wolverine. I detest everything about the poisonous nuts from Columbus. After 2 weeks of listening to Urban Crier and getting screwed by the system, I will for the first time in my life not only cheer for the nuts, but hope they win 50-14 so the entire world knows the voters f-ed up.

I am a rabid Wolverine. I detest everything about the poisonous nuts from Columbus. After 2 weeks of listening to Urban Crier and getting screwed by the system, I will for the first time in my life not only cheer for the nuts, but hope they win 50-14 so the entire world knows the voters f-ed up.

That's just it Charles. The voters didn't "f-k up". They did their job which was the impossible task of ranking two teams with identical loss records, no common opponents and similar strengths of schedule. Ultimately a narrow margin voted in favor of FL and probably because at this point it looks like FL has a slightly tougher strength of schedule. And there really isn't any other rational way to compare them.

The f-k up was not the voters. Not at all. It was the venal and corrupt college presidents who insist on voting for this monstrosity for reasons that are flagrant lies.

Let me ask you this. Did Michigan's president vote for the BCS? If so, then you really need to focus your disgust where it belongs.

We don't use polls to decide anything else in life. We don't chose our president and Congress by whomever is ahead in the Gallop poll. We actually hold the elections. We don't award Olympic medals based on coaches polls. We actually run the races. We don't award the World Cup to Brasil based on polls. Or give the NCAA basketball crown to UCLA this year because they are leading in the polls? Why major college football?

PS, current ESPN Sportsnation poll question is this:

Does Notre Dame deserve to play in a BCS bowl? Out of 42,000 votes, 78% of respondents say NO. Only the state of Indiana has a majority who say yes.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/espnu/index?lpos=globalnav&lid=gn_ESPNU_ESPNU

Looks like I'm not alone.

Fear not, Mr. Drum.

The Prince of Darkness is a gentleman.

King Lear, Act III, Scene IV.

My 2 cents: Watching the SEC Championship, I said to my father & friend that if Florida wins, expect to see a Big 10 Championship game within 2 years. Unfortunately for UM, it was out of sight out of mind as Florida notched 2 wins NOT AT HOME after UM played their last game. More than even Urban Meyer's politicking, I think that is what did UM in. I don't want to get into a pissing contest because I think UM is very possibly the better team, but the SEC eats their own because the overall level of competition is better.

One last story: My dear friend was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer right before the Tennessee game. He & I watched almost every game together as a way to forget that horrible diagnosis. I wrote a letter to Urban Meyer about it, telling him the Gators were serving other purposes this season and my friend received a lovely and very encouraging note back from him. That's as good a reason to root for the upset on Jan. 8.

"no common opponents."

Actually, Florida and Michigan both played Vanderbilt, with Michigan blowing Florida out of the water by comparison.

That said, I'm glad our coach handled this with dignity and grace, unlike Urban who went into used car salesman mode in November.