Posted on 12/02/2013 8:34:12 AM PST by xzins
With one week to go before the BCS rankings leave us forever, an undefeated Big Ten power missing out on the national championship is somehow an actual worry. Meanwhile, Florida State's sitting pretty. Full standings below.
It doesn't matter that Ohio State went 12-0 last year. It doesn't matter that an unbeaten Auburn was shut out of the BCS National Championship in 2004. It doesn't matter that Ohio State has lost two national title games against SEC teams in recent years. It doesn't matter that the SEC has won seven straight championships.
Or at least it shouldn't.
What will matter, however, is whether the BCS polls and computers rank Ohio State or Auburn No. 2 next week, assuming the Buckeyes and (burnt orange and navy blue) Tigers win their respective conferences. We'd thought we were just about done with the season's series of debates over which team should rank No. 2 and which should rank No. 3, but we've only just now arrived at the biggest one yet.
For now, the updated BCS standings after Week 14's wild weekend:
A win by either the Spartans or the other Tigers would render all this moot (except for Auburn athletic director Jay Jacobs suddenly becoming a huge Mizzou* fan, we trust).
* Though Missouri would have a better case for No. 2 than Auburn would, if you ask me, since the (black and gold) Tigers have spent most of the year smashing fools by exorbitant margins. But nobody's asking me. Mizzou's probably too far back to jump that far, barring insanity.
If our new Nos. 2 and 3 win their conferences, the polls would be where Florida State finds its Pasadena opponent. While many voters would fall back on the SEC's presumed strength of schedule and difficulty (and most strength of schedule numbers do rate Auburn's as tougher so far), others would sympathize with a 13-0 BCS conference champion that was ineligible last year. At the moment, the Buckeyes hold that advantage, and would any voters who were unconvinced by an Auburn win over Alabama really be swayed by one over Missouri?
The difference could be Urban Meyer, who's successfully stumped his team into a BCS National Championship before -- and that was an SEC team at the expense of a Big Ten team. But do voters still think of Meyer as they did then? Whether Meyer's national profile has changed since '06 due to various controversies would actually matter. Like, actually help determine the season's champion. That's insane and ridiculous, but it's the system.
We don't know whether Auburn or Ohio State would win the right to go play FSU if the two played on a neutral field. We don't have a playoff yet, not for 12 more months. We do know the Buckeyes have won all but two of their games by multiple scores, while Auburn's won by a single score six times (including the two luckiest, most improbable winning plays of the year). Auburn's also lost a game by 14 points. Gus Malzahn and Nick Marshall have led an immaculate rebuild, but let's not let that loss be a footnote.
So it begins. One more week. The only vital contributions to the debate going forward will be those made by the players on the field in the Big Ten and SEC championship games.
But they would probably BE western in the SEC……..that’s my point….hypothetical anyway.
Nothing prepares a team for a title game like a gauntlet of quality conference teams. The SEC is different right now because it does not have to look outside the conference for quality opposition like the Big 10 does. The SEC champion goes into a title game being tested by quality teams several times. Big 10 teams, right now, don’t. When the Big 10 regains its strength and prominence, and it will, that will change. Right now, and for the last few years, they cannot legitimately make that argument. The Big 10 right now is only great in the minds of its fans, who are encouraged by their fawning big-market media outlets who would benefit so much from it being true.
What has happened on the field at the end of the season for too many years now is the real arbiter of the quality of Big 10 football. Right now, the OSU hype cannot be considered credible, only wishful thinking.
Yeah I wonder how that ol ticker is doing these days?
It never hurts to have the biggest sports broadcasting network in the world to do its public relations.
I think the playoff system is a plus. I’d rather the decision be made on the field in one game than made by armchairs.
I do think we can narrow the top teams down to a top 8 and feel fairly certain that we’ve included the top 2 teams in that group.
Basketball is different in that recovery and prep seem to be much quicker. I prefer the pro playoff system of both NBA and MLB with their best of 7 series.
In terms of actually isolating the best team, the NCAA tourney would be improved by going to the top 16 playing each other in a best of 3 format. How long’s it been since a #4 seed won the NCAA tourney?
Iron Bowl Hero Chris Davis Got a Standing Ovation from His Geology Class
Even if Myer hasn't got the Big 10’s level of play any where near the SEC’s, he is bringing their ethics down to a SEC level.
The speed was about the line not just the backfield. OSU’s offensive line couldn’t block the Gators faster defensive linemen and linebackers. So they were able to overwhelm the QB.
That’s an assertion. If they’d have been trapping the QB, or running him down as he tried to sprint away, you’d have a point. ...but that wasn’t what was happening.
That said...bah. It doesn’t matter any more.
What has happened on the field at the end of the season for too many years now is the real arbiter of the quality of Big 10 football. Right now, the OSU hype cannot be considered credible, only wishful thinking.
Really? Explain the BCS ranking system having OSU number 2?
Conference championship opening lines – Auburn a short favorite over Missouri
Bettors lay the points with Ohio State against Michigan State
One of the problems with college football (and football in general), is that one or two injuries can make all the difference. A team that looked like world beaters can become mediocre fairly quickly (see, Oregon).
Sure, there are injuries in all sports, but by far football is the sport most affected by them.
Well, a best of 7 with alternating home courts is the best way to actually determine BEST TEAM. But no system is perfect, and determining BEST TEAM is not necessarily the ultimate goal in a lot of respects.
To modify the NCAA basketball tourney the way you say would ruin it….might do a better job of finding the best team, but would ruin the magic of it, which is the unpredictability.
And I too think the play off is a plus, but the BCS actually did what it claimed it would do (few remember what that was) and this playoff will be far less perfect than everyone assumes it will.
I absolutely agree that the SEC has been dominant for going on a decade, but those things are cyclical. It wasn’t too long ago that we were blasting Pete Carroll.
Auburn/Alabama is a state bragging rights game, a rivalry 2nd to none, so yes, it was not a “bad” win or loss for either team.
However, if you go look up the average recruiting stars of an OSU versus an Alabama incoming freshman football class, I think you’ll find little difference. That says to me that it’s a matter of the program more than the athletes.
I remember that when the Buckeyes won their last national title, few people gave them any chance against Miami. I'm not a fan of Ohio State at all but if they run the table two years in a row, I wouldn't dismiss them too quickly. Urban Meyer is a fine coach. Any team he coaches needs to be taken seriously.
I would say basketball is…..even more than football.
“Rivalry game...that was Michigan’s entire season riding on the line at home.”
..and a lifetime of accomplishment. Win that game and they are heroes for life.
I admit it as does the BCS. An AQ school gets preferred placing. That’s how the BCS works.
I guess it all comes down to this: Based on their perceived strength, the almighty SEC gets the nod whenever there are teams with equivalent records in the polling. That’s why Alabama was always on top this season. Now among all the one loss team, this still holds true, as positions 3, 4 & 5 are all SEC teams, which puts them at the top of the rankings for the one loss teams. It just so happens, they don’t (and shouldn’t) overtake AQ conferences with zero losses.
Thinking back, Florida did this in 2006. LSU (a two loss team) was the BCS participant because all of the AQ champs lost 2 games.
In 2008, Florida (with one loss) again went to the National Champ game over USC and Penn State.
in 2011, a one-loss Alabama team (who didn’t win their conference) took the slot instead of Stanford, the other one loss team.
So, it seems that the SEC has ALWAYS received this preferential treatment when it comes down to teams with the same losses. It just doesn’t fly for having MORE losses than the teams ahead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.