I’ll ignore your insane and illogical remarks about Miami being overrated and as for playing ranked teams, this year Miami has beaten Florida 41-16, Florida State 28-27, Pittsburgh 28-21, Virginia Tech 56-45, and Tennessee 26-3, all of which were ranked in the Top 25 at some point this season.
Since you apparently think that you have all the answers Neurotik :rolleyes: :rolleyes: who truly deserves to play in the Fiesta Bowl for the National Championship.
[What more could you ask?]
I know this is OT for this thread, but despite USC’s #1 strength of schedule rating, they haven’t done more than Miami or OSU against ranked teams. Yes, USC played 8 games against teams who were in the top 25 at the time. Yes, 10 of their 12 opponents were ranked at some point in the season. That means they played more good teams than OSU or Miami and fewer mediocre to joke teams, and it should (and does) help their ranking. What’s more important than playing good teams is playing - and winning against - other elite teams. Let’s look at how USC, Miami, and OSU did against the elite - teams that were in the top 25 at the end of the season.
USC is only 3-2 against teams that ended up in the top 25 (AP/USA Today/BCS), with wins over Notre Dame (11/12/9), Colorado (14/14/13), and Auburn (19/22) and losses to Kansas St. (6/6/8) and Washington St. (7/7/6).
Miami is 5-0 against teams that ended up in the top 25 (AP/USA Today/BCS), beating Florida (22/20), Florida St. (16/16/14), Virginia Tech (21/19), West Virginia (15/13/15), and Pittsburgh (24/23). Against top 15 BCS teams, USC is 2-2, with an impressive win over Notre Dame, but 2 losses. Miami also has 2 wins against BCS teams, and no losses.
Ohio St. is 3-0 against top 25 teams (same number of wins as USC, with no losses), and all three are top-15 BCS: Washington St. (6), Michigan (11), and Penn St. (12). Since Washington St. is ranked higher than Notre Dame, and Michigan & Penn St. are ahead of Colorado and Auburn, I’d call these 3 wins more impressive than USC’s biggest 3.
Outside of their games against ranked opponents, Miami & OSU did have weaker schedules than USC, but their games weren’t all against the Florida A&M’s and San Jose St.'s of the world. OSU faced Minnesota, Wisconsin & Purdue, who are good enough to be heading to Bowls, and Miami took out Bowl teams Boston College & Tennessee. More importantly, Miami beat 5 of the top 25 teams (and 2 of the top 15) without losing to any, and Ohio St. beat 3 of the top 15 teams without losing to any, but USC lost 2 games, while winning a comparable 2 against top 15 teams (3 against top 25).
Unless you want to argue that all of these rankings are way off, then OSU, Miami, & USC have comparable wins against ranked teams, but USC has a couple losses as well. With 2 losses, USC should be happy to be 4th in the nation. And we’ll see how they do against Iowa.
Nebraska certainly dominated college football in 1995, but I don’t think they could’ve taken an NFL team. There’s a reason you don’t see the option run much in the NFL. Defenses are too quick, and they’re also stronger & better tacklers than college D’s. Even with Tommy Frazier and Ahman Green, you aren’t going to win with the option in the NFL, and your option QB is going to take a beating. Berringer may have been a great back-up throwing the ball, but that wasn’t Nebraska’s strength, and they couldn’t have taken an NFL team with it. And the 'huskers D, which may have punished Florida in the Fiesta Bowl, would have gotten punished by any NFL offensive line.
Unfortunately, they are experienced in losing. When they had a bye week, the bye was favored by three points.
None of the Miami players could play on the Bengals, that’s true. And it’s probable that none of the Bengals 1st or 2nd round picks could bring themselves to sign either. Cincy is the capital of NFL Loserdom. They keep finding new and better ways to lose.
And they would find a way to lose to Miami.
And dammit, the Bengals are MY Team! :smack: :smack: :smack:
I’m being insane and illogical? Cute. USC still played a much tougher schedule. How much tougher?
Let’s look at the final BCS standings…USC had the most difficult schedule in college football. Miami had the 19th. I wonder if that makes it easier or harder to go undefeated?
Miami didn’t play a team that ended up higher than 14th in the final BCS standings. Read it again. No team higher than 14th.
USC, on the other hand, played four teams ALL higher than 14th. Washington St., Kansas St., Notre Dame and Colorado. Lost two of the games and won two of the others. They put a beating down on Colorado (40-3) and Notre Dame (44-13) and barely lost to Wash. State (30-27) and average loss to Kansas State (27-20). In the end though, they lost to two teams that were much better than any team Miami beat.
Now then, let’s get this clear. I hate the BCS. My first option is the old Bowl system without any of this silly national champion stuff. Frankly, I hated last year’s Rose Bowl. It should be the Big Ten Champ vs. the Pac-10 Champ. I accept nothing less.
My second option is an actual playoff system. I mean, if you are going to have a national champion, then this stupid BCS system needs to go. There’s too many variables and too many different schedules for it to work properly, IMO.
Now then. As to who should be in the Fiesta Bowl. It should be Miami vs. either USC or Georgia. I could accept Iowa. Ohio State was lucky too many times, I think, and are playing above their heads. It will all come crashing down when they play Miami, who is definitely one of the top three teams in the country, maybe number one (but not by much).
And for what it’s worth, Brad Banks should get the Heisman.
Looking back at the end of the season and saying that “so and so doesn’t deserve to be #1 because none of the teams they beat were ranked higher then # such and such at the end of the season” makes no sense.
When Florida and Miami played Florida was ranked in the Top 10. The Virginia Tech game was supposeldy going to be THE GAME of the year, at least until they lost to Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and West Virginia in succession.
No one has beaten Miami in nearly 2 years.
2 Years.
As for Ohio State somehow not deserving to play for the national championship because “they were lucky one too many times,” that’s simply insane.
looking at Ohio States schedule this year, the only game where I can even say that anything approaching luck was going Ohio States way was the Purdue game where they scored in the final 2 minutes.
Ohio State, like Miami is undefeated.
They are the only 2 undefeated teams in Division IA.
USC has 2 losses.
Georgia has one loss and that was to Florida.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Neither of those two teams deserve to be in the Fiesta Bowl.
Why?
It’s simple.
They lost games.
if they had gone undefeated, then you might have an argument for one of them replacing Ohio State, but Miami has to be there for 3 reasons.
They are the defending national champions.
They are undefeated.
They haven’t lost a game in nearly 2 years. Can any other Division I team say that?
Don’t think so.
And let us not forget that fateful game when mighty Miami was losing to Rutgers at halftime.
Rutgers.
RUTGERS!!!
Sure, they got their shit together enough to win the game. But the fact remains that at one point in the game, the number one team in the nation was losing to RUTGERS.
It just ain’t right.
Ohio State almost lost to Cincinnati. And Purdue.
Better than Rutgers, and both are bowl bound, but neither are powerhouses.
What exactly is your point?
Because Miami was losing to a team at halftime, they don’t deserve to play for the National Championship?
Sure.
That’s logical.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Sorry, WSLer. Are you honestly telling me that a team who goes undefeated against easier teams is necessarily better than a team who plays much more difficult teams and lost a few?
That just makes no sense. With that logic, Michigan should just move into the WAC and go undefeated EVERY season and guarantee a spot in the Championship game.
No, it definitely matters who they played. And stop this nonsense about they played teams that were ranked in the beginning of the season. So freaking what? First off, USC still played more ranked teams than Miami did. Second off, just because a team is ranked high after a few games isn’t indicative of where it SHOULD be. You can only see how good the teams were AFTER the season. And looking back on the season, we can plainly see that Miami just didn’t play anyone that challenging.
Frankly, I believe Miami should be in the Fiesta Bowl. We both agree on that. Miami may even be the best team in the country. But you know what? We’ll never know because Miami cakewalked through the regular season and know gets to play another team that shouldn’t be in the Championship game. The second year in a row.
A playoff is the only way to go. None of this BCS crapola.
Don’t forget they went to OT against Illinois, and scraped past Michigan.
I don’t think you can hold scraping past Michigan against them, the Wolverines are a top 15 team. you’re dead on about illinois though. god I hate the buckeyes.
5-ht, former Wolverine
If you agree that the important thing is the quality of opponents, as measured by end-of-season records, how can you keep Ohio St. out of the Fiesta Bowl? Did you even read my other post? The best team that Ohio St. beat (Washington St.) is better than the best team that USC beat (Notre Dame). The next two best teams that OSU beat (Michigan & Penn St.) are better than the next two best teams that USC beat (Colorado & Auburn). All other wins by OSU & USC were against teams that did not end up in the top 25. Yes, USC played 2 other highly ranked teams - Washington St. & Kansas St. - but they lost to both of them. Are you saying that playing and losing to these teams should give USC an advantage? That it is better than never playing them at all? Of course a loss (or 2) against a great team (or 2) shouldn’t hurt their ranking as much as a loss (or 2) against not-so-great teams, but it should still count against them. Yet you, inexplicably, seem to be counting these two games in their favor. What really matters is who you beat, not who you play, and OSU has done more against the top 15 than anyone else in college football.
As to your comment about OSU getting lucky, the last time I checked the purpose of a football game is to win. That’s what OSU did. Every game. Miami, too. Yes, it may be more impressive if you win by a lot, or if you have a big lead for most of the game. That may help you a little bit in the polls. It may help your reputation, and it might change the way that Vegas sees you or the way you get compared to teams from other years. You may think that they played “above their heads”, but who plays in the bowls should be decided (as much as possible) on the field, not based on what you think. Teams that seem wonderful to all the pundits but still lose a couple games should not be put ahead of teams who don’t seem all that great yet somehow manage to win every single game that they play. What really matters is not the margin of victory or how good you look, it’s that you win. That’s how they decide rankings in the NFL, and that should be the main factor in deciding rankings in college. Who you play is the other big factor (which is why Bowling Green never made the top 15 despite winning their first 8 and why 11-1 Boise State isn’t top 15 now) but I think I already covered that for Ohio St.
Actually that makes perfect sense because one team is undefeated and the other is not.
As for Miami not playing anyone that challenging, did you ever stop to think that this might be because Miami was/is a notch or 6 above the rest of the Division IA field, both talent wise and performance wise?
Oh no, that would be giving Miami even a teeny bit of credit.
Can’t do that.:rolleyes:
Next you’re going to tell me that Miami didn’t deserve to play in the National Championship game last year either.
Look, it’s REALLY simple: Until a team beats Miami, they are the #1 (best) team in NCAA Division IA.
End of argument and discussion.
And you still haven’t said who should really be playing Miami and getting their ass handed to them instead of Ohio State.
You must be a Miami grad, otherwise you probably wouldn’t be acting this irrational.
Miami not playing anyone that challenging has nothing to do with them being better! It’s not a comparison of how well Miami did against the team! Miami didn’t play anyone that challenging because they never played anyone who ended up being ranked in the top ten. My God, how can you not see this??
No, that’s just REALLY simplistic. There’s a difference. Again, as I pointed out, why not just move your team into the WAC and then go undefeated every year? Does that make you the best team? No. Because the strength of your competition matters. To say otherwise is just bizarre.
Frankly, this is the last I’m going to say on this subject. You obviously have this insane infatuation with Miami and can’t stand to see any criticism of them and respond by putting your hands over your ears and shrieking “UNDEFEATED! UNDEFEATED!”
Goodbye.
Way to cut and run when you realize you’re going to lose the argument.
Very mature.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: