Posted on 12/02/2006 9:05:42 PM PST by DeaconBenjamin2
Florida and Chris Leak beat Arkansas 38-28 to win the SEC Championship. According to the CFN Formula, which ranks the teams based on who had the best seasons, the Gators deserve to play for the national title. Not only isn't Michigan No. 2 in the CFN Formula, it's not third, or even fourth.
Who should play Ohio State for the national title? Michigan will most likely end up playing Ohio State in a rematch, but does it deserve it? According to the CFN Formula, which ranks teams based on what actually happened on the field and takes all subjectivity out of it, here are the rankings of four teams currently in the debate for the number two spot. This is NOT a ranking of which teams are the best or most talented. This is a formula to find out which teams had the best seasons based on who they played, who they beat, and who they lost to. We'll put out the entire 119-team ranking next week.
Out of Michigan, Florida, Louisville and Boise State ...
The Formula's Components:
1. Wins. - If you win, everything else falls into place. Each win counts as 1.
2. Quality Wins - The number of wins over teams that finished with a winning record. Each win counts as 1.
3. Elite Wins - The number of wins over teams that finished with two losses or fewer. Each win counts as 1 with a road win over an Elite team getting an extra 0.5. Also counting as 1 is a road win over a team that finished with three losses or fewer (but the extra 0.5 isn't added).
4. Bad Loss - The number of losses to teams that finished with three wins or fewer or a loss to a DI-AA team. Each loss counts as minus-1. Take away an additional 0.5 for a Bad Loss at home.
5. Bad Win - The number of wins to teams that finished with three wins or fewer, or a win over a D-IAA team. Each win counts as minus 0.25.
6. Elite Loss - The number of losses to teams that finished with two losses or fewer. Each loss counts as 0.25.
7. Point Differential - Points for minus points against divided by 100.
8. Winning Percentage - To take losses into account, winning percentage is in the mix.
1. Florida CFN Score: 24.92
Record: 12-1, Quality Wins: 7, Elite Wins 3, Bad Loss 0, Bad Win 1, Elite Loss 1, Point Difference 2, Winning % 0.92
2. Louisville CFN Score: 21.60
Record: 11-1, Quality Wins: 6, Elite Wins 1, Bad Loss 0, Bad Win 1, Elite Loss 1, Point Difference 2.68, Winning % 0.92
3. Boise State CFN Score: 21.11
Record: 12-0, Quality Wins: 5, Elite Wins 1, Bad Loss 0, Bad Win 3, Elite Loss 0, Point Difference 2.86, Winning % 1.00
4. Michigan CFN Score: 20.54
Record: 11-1, Quality Wins: 4, Elite Wins 2.5, Bad Loss 0, Bad Win 0, Elite Loss 1, Point Difference 1.87, Winning % 0.92
Case for Michigan
1. Michigan is generally acknowledged by almost everyone as the nation's second best team. Even when USC was ranked number two, that was more of a function of the voters preventing a rematch than it was a confirmation of the Trojans.
2. The first game in Columbus didn't settle the issue in the minds of many. If you're a believer that home field advantage means three points, then Michigan and Ohio State are dead even. Now, many want to see what would happen on a neutral field.
3. Going into this last weekend, Michigan played the nation's third toughest schedule behind Cincinnati and one other team which will go nameless for a moment.
4. It's not like Florida showed great pizzazz getting to 12-1. There's a reason no one's been pushing the Gators for the national title; it has been a bit zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz (Percy Harvin excluded). While style points shouldn't matter, Florida got sacked by Auburn in a 27-17 loss; the offense was shut down in the second half (but the defense was impressive). Michigan's one loss, of course, was as forgivable as it gets.
5. The offense should be every bit as good in a rematch with Ohio Stat, if not better. Mario Manningham was just getting back in the swing of things. One of the nation's best receivers, Michigan's offense is far more potent when he's 100% and rolling. Those 39 points and close to 400 yards of total offense weren't a fluke.
Case for Florida
1. Schedule, schedule, schedule. Going into the final weekend of the season, the Gators played the nation's toughest schedule, and it wasn't even close. The cumulative opposition winning percentage was 0.643. Number two Cincinnati was 0.622. That might not seem like much, but it is.
2. The SEC deserves a break. Auburn got hosed in 2003 when USC and Oklahoma squared off for the national title. If you believe the SEC is the nation's toughest conference, then its champion should go in.
3. Michigan didn't win it's own conference title. If you're the number two in your league, how is it possible, theoretically or practically, that you should be named the best team in the country?
4. Michigan beat an overrated Notre Dame team that had one win over a team with a pulse (Georgia Tech) and got by Wisconsin before the Badger offense, primarily the receivers, began to jell. Ohio State and Michigan basically fattened up their records against a horrible Big Ten while Florida ended up beating nine bowl teams and lost to one.
5. The defense is the real deal. The secondary might be a bit suspect, but the front seven, despite injuries, is rock-solid. Throw in a veteran quarterback like Chris Leak, and a head coach in Urban Meyer who doesn't lose when he gets more than two weeks to prepare, and you have a team more than good enough to not just challenge the Buckeyes, but beat them. Michigan had its chance, and lost.
Case for ... Boise State?!
1. 12-0. There are two teams in America without a loss. Boise State does play in Division-I, doesn't it? If there's no playoff and no chance to actually prove it on the field, you do have to consider all 119 teams for the title. It's time to pay more than lip-service when it comes to giving the "little guy" a shot.
2. Michigan already lost to Ohio State and no one outside of the Gainesville metropolitan area is jazzed up about a Gator-Buckeye championship. If you ever wanted to see a team like Boise State get a shot, this should be it.
3. The program deserves it. With 85 wins in eight years, it's not like this is some fluky, one-season wonder.
4. Fine, so the schedule is awful getting to fatten up on WAC teams, but Boise State obliterated Oregon State 42-14, beat a very good Hawaii team 41-34, crushed Utah 36-3, and stomped on Nevada 38-7.The Broncos have shown up in big occasions all year long and played their best football.
5. George Mason!
A little additional research shows that Colley (another of the formulas used for the BCS) through last week had Michigan with the 5th toughest schedule strength, and Florida with the 48th toughest. Colley also had the Big Ten as the clear #1 conference, and the SEC as #2.
Ummmm...because the only game that counts for the "national championship" is the national championship game?
Ohio State has to win in Glendale on January 8th to become "national champion," just as whoever is its opponent must, regardless of who its opponent is. What happened in the regular season is irrelevant, once the contestants are chosen.
Of course, the Michigan that would play in Glendale isn't the same Michigan that lost to tOSU (for one thing, Manningham would probably be healthy), which is only one reason the whole notion of a "national champion" in college football remains silly.
You must have been watching a different game than I did. Much of the game, perhaps, but not the entire one. Michigan drove down the field and scored a touchdown on the first possession of the game.
I agree; I was clearly complaining about the new (BCS) system, not the old bowl system. But if/when the BCS is abandoned there's little or no chance of college football going back to the old system, and if that's the case then an attractive option, imo, would be to incorporate the bowls within an 8-team playoff format.
That was razor close, the game hanging on one call.
Florida won't be able to hang with them at all.
Michigan pulled its starters in the fourth quarter in a rout.
Florida was gasping against them and almost lost.
Free Boise State!
Why Should have had Florida to beat FSU twice in 1996 to win the national championship???
If Dallas plays Indy in the Super Bowl, why should Dallas have to beat the Colts twice to win it, or if Chicago plays New England in the Super Bowl, why should New England have to beat Chicago twice???
What is the objective criteria here to determine strength of schedule???? Isn't strength of schedule based on polls, which if every sportswriter could do, would have Notre Dame ranked #1 every year.
"Actually, that's a simple one to answer. There is no "unfairness"."
I one of his last interviews, if not the very last, Bo Schembechler was asked about a rematch between OSU/Michigan, Bo said no way, it would be unfair to the team that won. I will take the word of Mr. Schembechler before I take the word of any fan.
I am against the playoffs at all costs. I like college football. The bowl system was part of college football and made it unique, and fun. Yes, there was always something to argue about. That's part of college football. If you want 100% certainty, go watch a math exposition. I don't see the need to turn college football into the XFL.
The bowl system was part of college football and made it unique, and fun.
And again, I was a big fan of that bowl system, and would like to see it return. But understand that it no longer exists, and it's not coming back. So the options remaining are the current BCS (which almost nobody likes) and a playoff system incorporating the bowls (which many longtime fans are lobbying for).
If you want 100% certainty, go watch a math exposition.
How is a playoff system equate to 100% certainty?
If you want "sytle points" go watch figure skating or gymnastics.
If not Michigan, then Florida would be my second choice. Somebody has to play OSU.
If not Michigan, then Florida would be my second choice. Somebody has to play OSU.
Looks like Bo knows... BCS insiders are saying Florida
If you like the bowl system, why is the BCS worse than playoffs? The BCS was just meant to be a transition to playoffs. At least it's preventing playoffs from happening.
The former doesn't look like it's going to happen, so I say let's get on with the latter. If you don't like the idea of a playoff system, I respect that. ....you're far from alone.
But let's not get carried away and compare it to watching a math exposition...lol.
Bravo! Well said.
I feel the same way. I like how every game has meaning. To have something like a 4-16 game playoff would make games like the Nov. 18th OSU-Michigan contest completely meaningless. I'm an OSU fan and can truthfully say that if we had lost to UM, I would be against a rematch. We would have lost our biggest game of the year. Time to forget about do-overs and prepare for revenge in next years game.
There will always be controversy no matter what system is used. In a playoff, there will still be arguments from the teams who are left outside of the top-4 or even top-16, seedings, regions where teams play, etc.
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.