I will boycott the BCS if...

ShowThemOhiosHere's picture
November 27, 2011 at 12:44a
11 Comments

Let's forget about the potential SEC orgy that could be the National Championship game.  I've heard that bowl projections have Michigan going to the Sugar Bowl.  I heard that Michigan could go over Stanford, who only has one loss, because they "travel better".  This is absolute bullshit.  Michigan does not deserve to go to a BCS game, and if they do, on top of the LSU/Bama title game shit (if it happens), I am boycotting the BCS bowls this year, and possibly in future years, except for BCS bowls that feature the Buckeyes, of course.

I shouldn't need to explain why Stanford deserves a BCS bid over Michigan, as the teams' records are the main indication.  Here's why Michigan should not get a BCS bid:

As you know, only two teams from a conference can go to BCS bowls.  Michigan State and Wisconsin are clearly the two best teams in this conference.  They are both division winners.  They also both have two losses.  But they have to play each other in the B1G championship game next week, which means one of them is going to take a third loss.  Michigan, meanwhile, gets to stick with their two losses because they weren't good enough to go the B1G championship game.  You're essentially punishing MSU or Wisconsin for winning their divisions, and rewarding Michigan's impotence against MSU and Iowa. 

"Well OSU got to go to BCS bowls all those times they had two losses".  OK, about that.  2003, 2005, 2008, and 2009 were all years that two loss OSU teams got BCS bids.  In 2009, we won the B1G outright, thus the automatic bid.  In 2005 and 2008, we were B1G co-champions those years.  Each of those years, we lost to a top 5 ranked Penn State team, and a top 5 ranked team in out-of-conference play (USC in 2008, the eventual national champion Texas in 2005).  We beat two ranked teams in the 2008 regular season, and four ranked teams in the 2005 regular season.  In 2003, we finished 2nd in the Big Ten, and beat five ranked teams in the regular season.  Our losses were to a top 5 Michigan team, and a ranked Wisconsin team.  In all of those years, we never avoided the best competition to us in the conference (a team that could beat us or finished with a record equal to or better than our's).  Michigan avoided Wisconsin, a team that lost two B1G games on hail maries, and outside of that is probably the best team in this conference.  Now, I know that scheduling is not their fault, especially with B1G games, but it has to factor in when debating on worthiness of a BCS bid.

Michigan's two losses this season were to a ranked MSU, and unranked Iowa.  They defeated just one ranked team - Nebraska.  I see that Notre Dame managed to sneak in to the top 25, which obviously won't last since they lost.  The bottom line is, in all four of those seasons, we were either the best or 2nd best team in the B1G.  Is Michigan the best or 2nd best team in the B1G?  No.  MSU beat them, Wisconsin would beat them.  So Michigan avoids a B1G championship game berth, and gets rewarded with a BCS bid?  Bullshit.

Michigan is currently #15 in the BCS standings.  The only higher ranked team that lost this week was Arkansas - their 2nd loss, which came to #1 LSU, which means that they won't drop below Michigan.  5 of the 14 teams ranked ahead of Michigan are in the SEC, so 3 of them are out of the mix.  So now let's say Michigan is #12.  The potential at-larges ahead of them are Alabama (2), Stanford (6), Boise (7), Houston (8), Oklahoma (9, though they play Ok St next week), and Kansas State (11).  If Oklahoma loses, that's 3 for them, they're out.  If Oklahoma wins, then Oklahoma State is on the list as an at-large with only 2 losses.  Now Boise, I say they're overrated - if you're not in a power conference and are not undefeated, bye.  That still leaves Alabama, Stanford, Houston, Oklahoma State (if they lose next week), and Kansas State (a couple of tough losses, but probably a better resume than Michigan, not real sure about them).  

In conclusion, Michigan should not be in a BCS bowl.  If they are, I can only imagine the embarrassment it'll bring the B1G when they lose to Houston. 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Geraffi's picture

Your argument makes too much sense. But the BCS is all about $$$$. Scum will bring lots of eyeballs in an otherwise unpalatable post season. Think about it...
Oregon will go to the rose bowl after beating a 6-6 UCLA team in the PAC 12 championship. The NC game looks like it will be a rematch of the "most boring game of the century", someone from the big east will get an automatic bid making the orange bowl a lame duck. Houston should get an at large bid. Not a great slate. Not a great season of college football, in my opinion.
On the bright side, ND will not be playing in a BCS game!

TLB's picture

Michigan will be in the Sugar.  Will probably get Arkansas or Georgia.

faux_maestro's picture

They will be in the Sugar against Houston most likely. If we get the LSU-BAMA rematch, Arkansas and Georgia can't be in a BCS game since they already have 2 (LSU-BAMA) in BCS games. No more than 2 teams from one conference can be in BCS games.

Inní mér syngur vitleysingur

BuckeyeSaab's picture

Technically not true.  You could have more than two teams in.  The two team rule only kicks in when Conference Champ and Top-4-Ranking rule haven't kicked in to force more than two teams.  As a result the two team rule is used often and the one people are most familiar with.

The SEC can still get 3 teams in this year if the Bulldogs win a close game they will be in as SEC Champs and then LSU and Alabama will both be in due to both being in the top 4 in the rankings.

Hell, the max number of teams conference could have in it 5, although the improbability of that happening is extremely high.

I'm sorry for not being sorry.

faux_maestro's picture

Well then...thanks for the info man. All I know is I hope whoever Michigan plays gives them the beeting they deserve.

Inní mér syngur vitleysingur

Buckeye Chuck's picture

Factors like who travels better than who, and potential for TV ratings, have always been part of bowl calculations. If that weren't the case, 6-6 Ohio State would not be widely projected to get a Gator Bowl bid, while 7-5 Iowa is left on the outside.

Michigan will get lit up by Georgia or Arkansas, so it's certainly not all bad.

The most "loud mouth, disrespect" poster on 11W.

btalbert25's picture

I saw a projection last night that said Michigan will be playing agains Houston in a BCS bowl.  Part of me says Houston would work them over pretty bad and part of me says shit they got the easiest draw in the BCS. 

faux_maestro's picture

My opinion is that the Big East champ would be the easiest draw. Houston can play some offense. As we saw this weekend, Michigan's defense isn't really back yet.

Inní mér syngur vitleysingur

BuckeyeChris's picture

True. Keenum isn't likely to miss on any of the deep balls. However, I am not sure how sound Houston plays defense. Could be a track meet. 

TLB's picture

They might have to finish in the top 14 BCS standings to get an at-large bid.

mstevens24's picture

I dont understand these posts, this has been happening in other conferences since the BCS has come along. Right now you look like either a very ignorant or uninformed fan. Every time the 2 conference champions face, the loser almost always goes to a lesser bowl then that of the 3rd best conference team. And right now Michigan is the 3rd best I don't understand what is so hard for some of you to get that.