Can anyone beat Ohio State?

[madDdog67]

I don't think any college team can beat them and there are a few pro teams that would have a hard time.

Yeah, my two: the Raiders and the Redskins. Sheeshhh....talk about being a masochist.

 

[wrongway149]

"Can anyone beat Ohio State?"

The Baltimore Ravens could beat them :crosseye:

C'mon. The Cleveland Browns almost beat the Ravens.

 

[wrongway149]

No. Michigan had their chance and lost it. The game was not as close as everyone is claiming. It was a good game, but not a great game where the lead changed hands several times, etc. Michigan was up in the 1st quarter and didn't see the lead again.

.

I think this the key to beating the Buckeyes. They seem to flub around for the first two possessions of almost every game, and then turn it on like nobody's business.

A team that can capitalize early and then stay with them (which Michigan didn't really do) has a chance.

I'd like to see USC or Notre Dame take a crack at it. That would be something different! (although I am certainly a Buckeyes fan)

 

[Psycho]

Ranked by who...how?

Texas was the second game of the season...nobody was ranked in the BCS at that point. And, BTW, Texas ain't #2 now after falling to K-St. Which begs the question how good all those pundits have been so wrong when they had Texas as #2 in the AP? Could it be that they don't know $hit?

And Michigan...big woop...they hadn't played anybody up to that point so what had they done to be #2? The first really tough team they face and they get cracked...they are still #2 in the BCS...which is a travesty. I mean, what was the point in playing if you don't drop after a lose.

Anyway, the rankings a BS...the only way to truly prove it is a play-off system.

Agreed on some counts. I don't like the preseason rankings. The Pac10 seems to get too much hype with teams like Cal and/or Oregon starting out very high and dropping off considerably. That makes USC wins look more impressive by beating a team that was ranked in the top 10-15. Of course those teams end up ranked farther down at the end of the season so maybe they were ranked too highly in the first place?

Michigan has beat up on some weak teams but as said in another post every conference has weak teams in it. Michigan has beaten a couple of one loss teams that are currently ranked pretty high.

Other than Pac10 homers (and SEC homers of course) it seems that many "experts" think the SEC is the toughest conference around year in and year out. :hurray:

 

[Scout32]

Keep watching the Arkansas Razorbacks.If they beat LSU and Florida,they may be a dark horse candidate for the National Championship.:sneak: :hurray: :horse:

 

[MLaPanzer]

Well, when you play in what amounts to a 2 team conference it's not as hard as it might seem.

Let OSU or USC or Notre Dame or whoever play a full SEC schedule and see how they fair. Could OSU beat LSU, Arkansas or Florida on any given day...sure...but could they beat them playing back to back over a 5 week period with say an Auburn, Tennessee and/or Georgia thrown in? Oh, and if you should run that table you still got to play one of those teams for the conference championship.

Please, the media have their darlings so it won't matter anyway. It will probably be OSU (no championship game so their in) vs either USC or Notre Dame. IOW, it will be the two most media hyped teams not the two best teams playing for the title.

What we need is a play-off system.

How about having one of those SUUTHERN teams come up north and play in Ann Arbor,Columbus or Madison in November and see how that is. Nope not gonna happen. When is the last time an SEC team played a REAL team north of the Mason -Dixion line? I thought you southerners were supposed to be so tough. Sounds like a bunch of whiny cry babies to me.:laugh:

 

[Marty Ward]

WHAT!?!?

They aren't even the best defense in the Big Ten (3rd) much less the nation (12th).

There are 3 SEC teams that rank higher in total defense than Michigan. OSU ranks 2nd in total defense...but still gave up 39 to a Michigan team that only ranks 24th in total offense. The reason that OSU ranks so high in total defense is because, except for Texas, Wisconsin and Michigan, they played a bunch of chumps. And Wisconsin/Michigan aren't all that good...they just play the same chumps that OSU played.

OSU opponents offensive rankings were abysmal...after Texas (2nd) it drops to Wisconsin(23) and Michigan(24)...after that it plummets. So no wonder OSU total defense ranks at 2nd nationally...the chump factor again.

OSU better hope they don't face Florida or Arkansas...if they do they get an a$$ wuppin...southern style. :laugh:

A defense that gives up ~29 yards rushing and ~12 points per game is pretty good.

I'm not sure who you think is better than OSU in the SEC.

Florida played a schedule that included such powerhouses as Western Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky and University of Central Florida.

Arkansas played powerhouses like Utah State, Vanderbilt, Southern Missorui State and Louisana-Monroe.

I think OSU will beat whoever they play. Of course, that's why they play the games, to see who's best!

 

[Marty Ward]

C'mon. The Cleveland Browns almost beat the Ravens.

They almost beat the Steelers too. But they still lost which is all they count.

 

[Marty Ward]

My prediction is OSU beats USC for the championship.

 

[Tater]

I think OSU will beat whoever they play. Of course, that's why they play the games, to see who's best!

Actually they don't...if they did there would be an 8 team playoff to determine the champ. If they went to a play-off system you would actually see teams putting together a tougher schedule because there wouldn't be any reason not to. So what if you lost a game or two outside your division/conference...you can still make the play-offs. Of course all the chump schools would be out in the cold.

Anyway, history shows us now that the key to the national championship is getting hyped to #1 preseason and playing a soft schedule. Then you end up having to play only one really tough game all year.

 

[Tater]

Yer tap dancing tater.

If you think that's impressive, you ought to see me do the Macarena!!! :laugh:

 

[Dr Zaius]

Anyway, history shows us now that the key to the national championship is getting hyped to #1 preseason and playing a soft schedule. Then you end up having to play only one really tough game all year.

College football is not entirely "fair" in the sense that all teams start completely equal like the NFL. Salary caps and free agency ensure that no single NFL team can horde all the best players or start with an unfair advantage.

But there really is no way for college football to emulate the NFL in this manner. For starters, there are just way too many schools to have a pure playoff system. There are massive disparities between the size of the schools and their respective sports programs, so if you threw out the ranking system how would schedules be determined? It would be a mess.

The only way this could possibly work is if college football was divided into multiple championships, sort of like high school football with A, AA, AAA, AAAA, and AAAAA to keep things fair. Unfortunately even this wouldn't produce fair results because there are currently no regulations governing how much schools can spend on a particular sports program. So one mid-sized college (AAA) might have a football budget of $10 million, while another school of the same size has a budget of $50 million. And then there are schools like Army, Navy, and Air Force which compete at a huge disadvantage due to the weight restrictions placed on players.

The long and short of it is that college football is a mess and probably always will be. I just don't see any way to really make it "fair" like the NFL is.

 

[Dr Zaius]

I will add one additional thing. I have long complained that in my view southern teams always enjoy an unfair advantage over teams like OSU in the championship game. Why? Allow me to explain.

Home field advantage is a massive advantage, on that I think we can all agree. One of the reasons NFL teams fight so hard at the end of the year is for home field advantage during the playoffs. You better believe the Cowboys do not want to be playing the Packers at Green Bay during the NFC playoffs. Yikes!

There is no playoff system in college, only a championship game. Why is that championship games are always held deep in the south? I feel it should alternate every other year. Why should OSU be forced to travel down to Florida or wherever? How about making the southern teams play in the biting cold and snow once in a while? Fair is fair.

And no, I don't give a damn if the spectators freeze or not. 99% of the people at the championship game are corporate suits and celebrities who don't even know how to spell football anyway.

 

[Tater]

The only way this could possibly work is if college football was divided into multiple championships, sort of like high school football with A, AA, AAA, AAAA, and AAAAA to keep things fair. Unfortunately even this wouldn't produce fair results because there are currently no regulations governing how much schools can spend on a particular sports program. So one mid-sized college (AAA) might have a football budget of $10 million, while another school of the same size has a budget of $50 million. And then there are schools like Army, Navy, and Air Force which compete at a huge disadvantage due to the weight restrictions placed on players.

Not true...there are only about 80-90 schools that are ever in comp for national titles anyway...the rest don't care. We are almost there now with the conference championships.

Basically you have all the schools that really want to compete for the title get into 8 mega conferences of about 12-16 teams (which is about all that really care or ever have a chance anyway). All the other teams will play as independents and thus will be less likely to compete but still have a shot if they perform exceptionally well. That gives you a pool of 96-104 teams. For the play-offs you take the top 6 ranked conference champions plus 2 "At Large" (which can come from the conferences or independents). That gives you your 8 team play-off and would be pretty fair for everyone.

This also leaves a large crop of really good teams for the lower tier bowl games.

 

[Dave68124]

College football is not entirely "fair" in the sense that all teams start completely equal like the NFL. Salary caps and free agency ensure that no single NFL team can horde all the best players or start with an unfair advantage.

But there really is no way for college football to emulate the NFL in this manner. For starters, there are just way too many schools to have a pure playoff system. There are massive disparities between the size of the schools and their respective sports programs, so if you threw out the ranking system how would schedules be determined? It would be a mess.

The only way this could possibly work is if college football was divided into multiple championships, sort of like high school football with A, AA, AAA, AAAA, and AAAAA to keep things fair. Unfortunately even this wouldn't produce fair results because there are currently no regulations governing how much schools can spend on a particular sports program. So one mid-sized college (AAA) might have a football budget of $10 million, while another school of the same size has a budget of $50 million. And then there are schools like Army, Navy, and Air Force which compete at a huge disadvantage due to the weight restrictions placed on players.

The long and short of it is that college football is a mess and probably always will be. I just don't see any way to really make it "fair" like the NFL is.

NFL is "fair". Come on. I guess you are saying the TV and merchanise revenue between Kansas City and New York are equal under your thesis.

In college football, it comes down to the system in which good players are made into great players. There is a reason that Ohio State is a top notch school every year - the system and not the overwhelming prospects to living in Columbus, Ohio. There was a reason why Nebraska won 3 National championships in 4 years - again, I grew up in Lincoln, and not a hot spot for recruiting.

College football is the only sport where each and every game means something. This would not change with or without a playoff system as to be a conference champion you play most of your games in conference (except 4 independents). Hell, you can lose 6 or 7 games in the NFL and still make it to the playoffs.

You are correct that Army, Navy and Air Force are a bit hamstrung, however, I watched Navy beat a couple of good teams this year and Air Force take Tennessee down to the wire. Why, because they have established systems.

I would argue that college football has become more competitive top to bottom over the last 15 years than ever before (e.g., Rutgers). Would I like to see a playoff system? - absolutely. The current commissioners couldn't find their a$$ with their hands tied behind their back. But to argue the NFL is "fair" as compared to college football is a bit of stretch.

 

[Dr Zaius]

NFL is "fair". Come on. I guess you are saying the TV and merchanise revenue between Kansas City and New York are equal under your thesis.

In college football, it comes down to the system in which good players are made into great players. There is a reason that Ohio State is a top notch school every year - the system and not the overwhelming prospects to living in Columbus, Ohio. There was a reason why Nebraska won 3 National championships in 4 years - again, I grew up in Lincoln, and not a hot spot for recruiting.

There's a GIGANTIC difference between the Maine Black Bears and Ohio State Buckeyes! Nothing even approaching that level of disparity exists in the NFL, nor can it due to the way the league is now structured.

The NFL has a revenue sharing scheme in place to help balance out the differences between teams in very lucrative areas vs. those in smaller cities. In addition, the salary cap prohibits teams from simply buying a "dream team" even if they have massive amounts of cash available to do so. Again, nothing like this exists for college, and universities are free to spend as much or as little as they want to build the perfect sports program.

In the NFL all teams start off 0-0, and there are no rankings that have any meaning whatsoever other than win-loss ratio. The NFL playoff system is mathematically symmetrical and there is a single champion every year.

So is the NFL fair? Nothing is ever "fair" in the world of sports. But every team in the NFL has the same salary cap and just as good a chance as any other to play in the championship game. Not so in college football. A team can be undefeated in college football and not even make the top 25 rankings. Standings in the NFL are not subjective and based on AP Top 25 votes or any such system.

To claim that college football is more fair than the NFL is not really logical, IMHO.

 

[Marty Ward]

Not true...there are only about 80-90 schools that are ever in comp for national titles anyway...the rest don't care. We are almost there now with the conference championships.

Basically you have all the schools that really want to compete for the title get into 8 mega conferences of about 12-16 teams (which is about all that really care or ever have a chance anyway). All the other teams will play as independents and thus will be less likely to compete but still have a shot if they perform exceptionally well. That gives you a pool of 96-104 teams. For the play-offs you take the top 6 ranked conference champions plus 2 "At Large" (which can come from the conferences or independents). That gives you your 8 team play-off and would be pretty fair for everyone.

This also leaves a large crop of really good teams for the lower tier bowl games.

80 or 90? What country do they play in? :nuts:

At best 20 teams have a legitimate shot at the title at the start of the season and by the end MAYBE there are 4-5 that have a legitimate claim to being in the title game. And if there is only 1 undefeated team AND they play in a major confrence they are in it. How can they not be, they played major programs and beat ever one they played.
You may cry about how good Florida is but the fact is they lost to a team that lost 2 games.
You may say Arkansas deserves it but they lost to USC so why should they go instead of USC?
Auburn 2 losses.
LSU, 2 losses.
Tennesee 3 losses.
The Big Ten has 3 teams in the top ten, the SEC has 2. Heck the Big East has as many top ten teams as the SEC. Heck the ACC has as many ranked teams as the SEC. Why do you down the Big Ten as a poor league?

A single elimination playoff does not determine who is-the best team, it determines who played best that particular day. A single elimination playoff tourney doesn't determine who the best team is for the year, it determines who wins the mini-tournament. I mean as it stand would yuo think Louisville is the best team in the nation if they beat OSU, VT and ND to win a playoff tourney?
No team can say they will play a tough schedule year after year because the schedules are set years in advance. You get a good crop of players and you might be one of the best for 2-3 year then poof.
I like it the way it is. Since the top 5 teams rarely play the same opponents much less each other during the season there is no good way to determine the champion so why not let fans believe THEIR team was really the best!

 

[Psycho]

You may cry about how good Florida is but the fact is they lost to a team that lost 2 games.
You may say Arkansas deserves it but they lost to USC so why should they go instead of USC?
Auburn 2 losses.
LSU, 2 losses.
Tennesee 3 losses.

That is the reason I would have no problem with a rematch. It would kinda suck if they split the two games but at least one would be at a neutral site. I doubt it will happen but it depends on how things play out.

Michigan has 1 loss: #1 OSU
If USC stays on 1 loss: they lost to Oregon State
If Florida stays on 1 loss: they lost to Auburn
If Arkansas stays on 1 loss: they lost to USC
If Notre Dame stays on 1 loss: they lost to Michigan
If Wisconsin stays on 1 loss: they lost to Michigan
Boise St & the Big East teams are too far back and not considered the equal of these teams anyway

Michigan has a claim to the #2 spot over any of these teams but I doubt the voters will keep them there since they "already had their shot at OSU." I keep hearing some of the sports people say that but the NC is supposed to be between the top two teams. I don't recall it being between the top two teams as long as they haven't played already. :hmmm:

 

[Psycho]

I will add one additional thing. I have long complained that in my view southern teams always enjoy an unfair advantage over teams like OSU in the championship game. Why? Allow me to explain.

Home field advantage is a massive advantage, on that I think we can all agree. One of the reasons NFL teams fight so hard at the end of the year is for home field advantage during the playoffs. You better believe the Cowboys do not want to be playing the Packers at Green Bay during the NFC playoffs. Yikes!

There is no playoff system in college, only a championship game. Why is that championship games are always held deep in the south? I feel it should alternate every other year. Why should OSU be forced to travel down to Florida or wherever? How about making the southern teams play in the biting cold and snow once in a while? Fair is fair.

And no, I don't give a damn if the spectators freeze or not. 99% of the people at the championship game are corporate suits and celebrities who don't even know how to spell football anyway.

I have the same problem with the Super Bowl. Even if you have home field throughout the playoffs you still have to play on a neutral site for the big game. No weather to have an effect on the outcome. SB team fans have to pay insane amounts to see their team and have to travel somewhere to see them. The guys are used to having a 15 min halftime show for every game but the SB halftime can be as much as 45 minutes long. Is it any wonder why we have so many blowouts in SBs? The SB is less about a championship game for real football fans and more about entertaining sh!theads with too much money tuning in to watch the commercials more than the football game.

 

[wrongway149]

The SB is less about a championship game for real football fans and more about entertaining sh!theads with too much money tuning in to watch the commercials more than the football game.

So what do we think?

NO MORE SUPER BOWLS AT NEUTRAL SITES?!

Man-law?-


Man-law!:toast: :drink: