Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Sports Talk
Reload this Page >

Should OSU and MICH considering moving their annual game?

Sports Talk Discuss all things Sports Related

Should OSU and MICH considering moving their annual game?

Old 10-25-06, 01:59 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 24,759
Should OSU and MICH considering moving their annual game?

This year, it seems apparent that these are (arguably) the best two teams in college football. Yet one will lose when they play each other at the end of the season, meaning that the loser will have no shot at the national title game simply by having the misfortunate of also playing in the Big Ten. That means that (assuming that USC loses), Auburn, USC, Florida or Texas will make the BCS championship game simply by virtue of having lost earlier in the season. That seems unfair.

Since these two teams are yearly national championship contenders, should they look into moving this game up in their schedules to account for this?

Let's table the "playoff" debate for another day.

Last edited by DVD Josh; 10-25-06 at 02:03 PM.
DVD Josh is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 02:01 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Work. Or commuting. Certainly not at home.
Posts: 17,816
While I agree with you to some extent, it's not necessarily the case that whoever loses is out of the title race. See Nebraska, 2001. See also Florida, 1996. UF lost their final regular-season game to FSU (and FSU and UF were the top 2 teams in the country at the time), still ended up in the title game, and beat FSU in a rematch for the title at the Sugar Bowl.

Edit: Also, assuming everyone else had 1 loss, I could see whoever loses this game remaining #2 in the BCS. Especially if it's close.
wildcatlh is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 02:06 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 24,759
Well teams normally drop at least 3-4 spots after a loss. The loser would probably have to drop to no worse than 3 and not at all in a couple polls to stand a reasonable chance of still making the title game. Out of curiousity, were either of your two examples in the BCS era?
DVD Josh is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 02:14 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Dr. Henry Jones, Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: My Car
Posts: 6,752
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Well teams normally drop at least 3-4 spots after a loss. The loser would probably have to drop to no worse than 3 and not at all in a couple polls to stand a reasonable chance of still making the title game. Out of curiousity, were either of your two examples in the BCS era?
Nebraska was BCS, Flordia was not.
Dr. Henry Jones, Jr. is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 02:14 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,497
nope
the big ten (11) should pick up another team and play a real conference championship game
then it wouldnt matter when they scheduled their yearly matchup
twikoff is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 03:07 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Columbia, MD, USA
Posts: 11,136
Originally Posted by WildcatLH
While I agree with you to some extent, it's not necessarily the case that whoever loses is out of the title race. See Nebraska, 2001. See also Florida, 1996. UF lost their final regular-season game to FSU (and FSU and UF were the top 2 teams in the country at the time), still ended up in the title game, and beat FSU in a rematch for the title at the Sugar Bowl.

Edit: Also, assuming everyone else had 1 loss, I could see whoever loses this game remaining #2 in the BCS. Especially if it's close.
Actually Florida in 1996 fell to third (also aided by the fact that Ohio St. also lost the same weekend, else Ohio St. would also have been ahead of them) and only "won" the national title because the two top teams, FSU and Arizona St. couldn't play each other. That would never happen today, as the Pac-10 is part of the BCS now.

I can't really speak to Nebraska in 2001, but I suspect with the current modified BCS formula, Nebraska also wouldn't have a shot at the title.

To answer the original question, yes they should move their game. Miami/FSU did this for the same reasons. Late losses always are more costly. Tenneessee benefited most of the '90s from this, as they would lose early to Florida, then bypass all the other one loss team by season's end (including at times Florida, who would lose to FSU).
Jericho is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 03:21 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 857
I agree that the Big 10 needs a 12th team so it can play a championship game. OSU and Michigan already get way too much street cred in the Big 10 on an annual basis. A championship game will lessen the effect that the Michigan/OSU game has as being more important than all the others in the Big 10 annually.
harrydoyle is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 03:22 PM
  #8  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,284
No.
Pharoh is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 03:35 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Hero
 
das Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 35,881
No. The winner of that game deserves the riches. The NCAA football season is a wacky season-long unbalanced tournament. I don't want to hear about neutral sites blah blah blah -- if you can't win that game during the regular season, you have no claim to the national title. It may work out where you still get a shot and you may win it all, but I don't want to hear any bitching about it if you don't. The winner of that game deserves the shot. The loser may be fortunate enough to get one.

das
das Monkey is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 03:57 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,973
Not move the date, but they should consider moving the time.

Now that ABC has college football telecasts at 2000 hours ET/1700 hours PT during the season, from now on the Ohio State/Michigan game should always be on at 2000 hours ET--the ultimate way to end that weekend of college football.
RayChuang is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 04:13 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The city with no sports championships...Cleveland
Posts: 2,109
i love the military time.....and man i hope osu wins that!!
paulringodaman is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 04:36 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 122,851
If moving it helps get us closer to a playoff I'm for it. If not, I'm against it.
Red Dog is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:00 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 857
My system would definitely be an 8 team playoff with 6 conference winners and two at-large bids, and the conference winners would either have to win a championship game or play every team within their conference.
harrydoyle is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:05 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Work. Or commuting. Certainly not at home.
Posts: 17,816
Originally Posted by harrydoyle
My system would definitely be an 8 team playoff with 6 conference winners and two at-large bids, and the conference winners would either have to win a championship game or play every team within their conference.
Nah. You're just trying to exempt the Big 10, since they're the only conference that doesn't apply to.
wildcatlh is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:13 PM
  #15  
Premium Member
 
The Cow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Grazing in a field somewhere...
Posts: 20,824
Originally Posted by das Monkey
No. The winner of that game deserves the riches.
Yep, and I'd even prefer to drop the whole BCS stuff and go back to where that meant who goes to the Rose Bowl, when that was a good thing.
The Cow is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:15 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Legend
 
kenbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 20,957
Originally Posted by das Monkey
No. The winner of that game deserves the riches. The NCAA football season is a wacky season-long unbalanced tournament. I don't want to hear about neutral sites blah blah blah -- if you can't win that game during the regular season, you have no claim to the national title. It may work out where you still get a shot and you may win it all, but I don't want to hear any bitching about it if you don't. The winner of that game deserves the shot. The loser may be fortunate enough to get one.

das
Das:

I may be misremembering you, but a couple of years ago when Oklahoma lost the Big XII title game yet still got invited to the Sugar Bowl (against USC?) and you defended the situation. My position back then was that if Oklahoma wasn't the best in their conference, they couldn't be the best in the country, so they shouldn't've been invited. You argued (then) that winning your conference doesn't mean you're the best -- you just happened to be the best that day. (And there's a whole can of worms just waiting to be opened if we press along this line of reasoning, so let's get back to the point I'm trying to make.)

So, isn't what you've just said a pretty strong counter-argument against a conference's non-champion playing in the BCS title game against a team from a different conference?
kenbuzz is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:22 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Quake1028's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Hurricanes Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 26,578
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
This year, it seems apparent that these are (arguably) the best two teams in college football. Yet one will lose when they play each other at the end of the season, meaning that the loser will have no shot at the national title game simply by having the misfortunate of also playing in the Big Ten. That means that (assuming that USC loses), Auburn, USC, Florida or Texas will make the BCS championship game simply by virtue of having lost earlier in the season. That seems unfair.

Since these two teams are yearly national championship contenders, should they look into moving this game up in their schedules to account for this?

Let's table the "playoff" debate for another day.
The UM-FSU rivalry has been ruined in the past few years. Part of it is the teams aren't as good as they once were, but another part of it is that it is now the first game of the season. I hate it. I needs to go back to late October like it always was.
Quake1028 is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:26 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
El Scorcho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 39,628
Actually they should cancel the game so we can have more undefeated teams at season's end to throw the BCS into a frenzy.
El Scorcho is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:27 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Legend
 
kenbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 20,957
Oh, and to answer the OP's question .... no. While the Ohio State-Michigan game dosen't always determine the Big 10, it sure seems like it does more often than not (or one team has a shot to spoil the others' bid). I like it where it is ... makes it more meaningful - particularly in a world where the post-season seems relatively meaningless except to two hand-picked schools.
kenbuzz is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 05:29 PM
  #20  
Retired
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 27,449
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
That means that (assuming that USC loses), Auburn, USC, Florida or Texas will make the BCS championship game simply by virtue of having lost earlier in the season. That seems unfair.
Actually, it's probable that WVU or Louisville will be undefeated and will get the spot in the game.

L'ville may get leapt by a one loss team, but I doubt WVU would give that they are currently ahead of all the 1 loss teams in the BCS and have their toughest part of the schedule coming up which will improve their poor computer ranking some.

In that case, it's not unfair at all as the loser of OSU/Michigan was already proven inferior to the winner, thus letting another undefeated team get a shot (rather than having a rematch) is perfectly fair.

Any time it's a bunch of 1 loss teams vying for a spot it's going to be a crapshoot, and we all know having a playoff is the only way to avoid that crap of earlier losses seemingly mattering more than later ones.
Josh H is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 07:15 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by Quake1028
The UM-FSU rivalry has been ruined in the past few years. Part of it is the teams aren't as good as they once were, but another part of it is that it is now the first game of the season. I hate it. I needs to go back to late October like it always was.
I thought the FSU-UM rivalry was moving back to late Oct. They had a 3 year deal w/ ABC to broadcast it on labor day, and that deal expired this year (at least that's what I heard on one of the sports talk shows a few weeks ago).
The Dude is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 07:51 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Hero
 
das Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 35,881
kenbuzz

Das:

I may be misremembering you, but a couple of years ago ...
Stalker alert! Dude, I have no idea. I'm not above arguing against my own opinion, or coming up with an elaborate scheme that links two seemingly disparate arguments, but I honestly don't remember that discussion (nor would I really care if I did ). Now that I think about it, though, I seriously doubt I would have argued that position. I remember supporting USC pretty heavily with their triple-OT loss on the road being the only blemish on their record.

Anyway, my opinion has always been as far back as I can remember that there are certain teams who deserve to play for the championship and others who get fortunate enough to be there based on circumstances. It's why I'll never support a playoff system that involves more than 4 teams, because you'll never convince me that 5 teams actually deserve it. In 2003, neither K. State nor OU deserved it. OU was just fortunate enough to make it.

I also don't buy into "Conference Championship" games. They're money-makers for the conferences. They create them for money and then whine when others don't follow suit. Tough shit. If Notre Dame doesn't want to share, more power to them. If the PAC-10 and Big-10 want the season to determine their champion and not a single game, more power to them. As such, I don't really put that much stock in the winner of a conference championship game. It has meaning in certain areas, but simply winning it doesn't mean you're better than some other team in the conference. It just means you won that game. There are riches that come with that, but I'm a supporter of the season as a whole, not single games. Often times, within the context of the season, that game has great meaning, but it's not always the case.

Relating all this back to my comments on the OSU/Michigan game, I'm reasonably assuming that they both go into this game undefeated. The winner should then get the riches. If one of them has 3 losses (like I believe K. State had), and the other is undefeated (like OU in '03), that's another situation entirely.

das

Last edited by das Monkey; 10-25-06 at 10:38 PM.
das Monkey is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 10:34 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Daryl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: You might catch me in Atlanta, looking like a boss
Posts: 13,712
A few quick thoughts on some of the points in this thread:

1) the game HAS been moved. It's at 3:30 , when it's always been a 12 or 1pm game

2) a big to a B10 conference championship. I'd rather see: play all 10 other teams and only two non-conference games. Or my personal favorite: boot PSU and play all 9 teams and 3 non conference

3) The loser of the upcoming game doesn't belong in the BCS championship game. You had your chance, you lost. Even if Michigan loses (which they won't)

Last edited by Daryl; 10-25-06 at 10:36 PM.
Daryl is offline  
Old 10-25-06, 10:43 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Quake1028's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Hurricanes Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 26,578
Originally Posted by TheDude
I thought the FSU-UM rivalry was moving back to late Oct. They had a 3 year deal w/ ABC to broadcast it on labor day, and that deal expired this year (at least that's what I heard on one of the sports talk shows a few weeks ago).
I pray you are right sir.
Quake1028 is offline  
Old 10-26-06, 08:14 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 24,759
Originally Posted by Josh Hinkle
Actually, it's probable that WVU or Louisville will be undefeated and will get the spot in the game.

L'ville may get leapt by a one loss team, but I doubt WVU would give that they are currently ahead of all the 1 loss teams in the BCS and have their toughest part of the schedule coming up which will improve their poor computer ranking some.

In that case, it's not unfair at all as the loser of OSU/Michigan was already proven inferior to the winner, thus letting another undefeated team get a shot (rather than having a rematch) is perfectly fair.

Any time it's a bunch of 1 loss teams vying for a spot it's going to be a crapshoot, and we all know having a playoff is the only way to avoid that crap of earlier losses seemingly mattering more than later ones.
I did forget about those two teams. UL is a bona fide contender, but I think that WVU's poor SOS will hurt them in the BCS rankings. Even though they are undefeated, I do not think the pollsters consider them an "elite" team. They are not. They will make a BCS bowl, and I predict that they will lose handily.

As to OSU / UM, if there are two unbeaten teams, then of course, this whole argument is a moot point. However, it seems to me that if there are numerous one loss teams, being dominant for 95% of the season only to be penalized for a late loss to the #1 or #2 team in the country seems like a poor reason not to make the title game, when those other teams with 1 loss didn't lose to a team like OSU or UM.
DVD Josh is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.