Gary Danielson defends his drum beat for Florida during the SEC title game

I think you're missing the point of that argument. What they're saying is that if any of those three teams - Louisville, Florida or Wisconsin - would have run the table and not lost a game along the way, they'd be locked into the BCS title game w/ Ohio State, no questions asked. Once you lose a game - whether it's against the No. 1 team in the country (Michigan) or to somebody else (Louisville, Florida, Wisconsin), you're putting yourself at the mercy of the BCS voters and computers.

 

And the Big 12 has a game televised on the relatively miniscule Fox Sports Net, and in my region that game would often be pre-empted by a regional game. And the Big East also starts its games at noon Eastern, like the Big Tenm but gets shunted to ESPN-Plus. But every Big Ten game, no matter how crappy, would end up on everything from ESPN on through to ESPNU and ESPN Classic. To say the SEC, which also has a game of the week that is not televised in every region, has an edge on the Big Ten, TV-wise, is absurd. The SEC has an image edge, granted, that probably overcomes that.

 

Danielson did Big Ten games for ABC for years before switching to CBS and the SEC package this year, and all season he's been marveling at the speed in the conference, particularly on defense. I didn't take his points so much as shilling for the SEC as a genuine belief that top to bottom, it was the best conference in the nation, and that voters should take a hard look at its one-loss champion next to the Big Ten's.

Part of the problem is not enough voters look at their whole ballot every week and truly evaluate which schools are deserving of which rankings. People are bothered when a team jumps another in the last poll, but really, shouldn't that be happening more week to week? Too many people slot a team somewhere and then just move 'em up one or down six for wins and losses.

 

Michigan lost to Ohio State. By three.

Florida lost to Auburn. By 10, I think.

If you concede that the rankings are correct, and Ohio State is better than Auburn, I don't see how you have an argument.


Two one-loss teams were under consideration, and one lost to a better team by fewer points. All the rest of this is poppycock. Unless you have the stones to say, "Nobody wanted a rematch in the national title game, so they screwed Michigan."

Which, for the record, I have no real problem with. It's a stupid system. Another stupid decision can only hasten its demise. And I'll watch Florida-Ohio State, just like everybody else.

I just wish people would stop acting like there was some kind of grand intellectual justification for it. Yes, Michigan could have beat Ohio State. Florida could have beat Auburn. Once you open the "could have" jar, you've lost the argument.

 

I'm telling you, the only answer is TECMO. Forget this onfield stuff. The NCAA obviously isn't interested in deciding the thing on the field, so we shouldn't be either! ;D

 

I'll give you Michigan lost to a better team by fewer points. BUT you're looking only at each team's loss and ignoring the wins. Florida's wins came against a much better schedule than Michigan's.

If you want to look only at the losses, too, take a closer look. IIRC, Auburn ran an interception back for a TD in the final minute. That was essentially a three point loss for the Gators. And Ohio State's lead was essentially two scores for most of the second half. Late TD and 2point conversion made game seem closer. Yes, final scores are final scores, but if you look closer you get a better sense for how the game played out.

And yes, I agree, it's a bad system.

 

To complete the discussion on 1996...

Ohio State was undefeated going into the Michigan. Had it won that game, then beaten Arizona State, it, not Florida, would have been national champ. Had Arizona State held on vs. Ohio State, it, not Florida, would have been national champ.

Florida, quite frankly, probably deserved it. It needed many scenarios right at the end of the year, and got them, and then soundly beat the nation's No. 1 team.

 

Why are people making an issue of which conference has more games on TV? That's not the point here. The point is the pandering that goes on. And if you believe for a second that ABC/ESPN isn't head and shoulders above every other network in that department, you haven't watched much college football the last three or four years.

Playing a game or two each week on CBS doesn't equal playing a game on ABC and then having eight hours of "discussion" on a sister network about the game and the conference. I'm sorry, but it doesn't. CBS has gotten in on the pandering a little during its halftime and post-game shows, but at best, you're talking about an hour and a half of Brando slobbering about the SEC.

That's the issue here -- the talking heads and their pandering to one conference or another. If it were just televised games, that would be wonderful. But it's not.

And the opinions those guys toss out do have an impact on voters. I don't care how dedicated you are to the process, you're not watching every game every Saturday. So, when the guys at ESPN give their opinions on a game a voter didn't see, that has to impact his decision.

Also, I don't get the whining about the idea that people don't want to see a rematch. Seems rather valid to me. Michigan had a chance to beat OSU. It didn't. Voting in a team with the same number of losses, more wins and a tougher schedule seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

did I miss something or is Herbstreit getting a pass on his shilling for the Big Ten and OSU?

 

Three of four years?

More like eight or nine years.

About the time ESPN decided to start screwing with the Heisman (among other things).

And there hasn't been a winner from the SEC since.

 

How quickly we forget. The Florida-Auburn game was much closer than the Ohio State-Michigan game. Auburn led by one point in the final minute before a field goal and fumble recover for touchdown on the final play. If Ohio State center can snap the ball or Tressel doesn't go soft in the final minutes, Michigan loses by double figures.

 

Auburn didn't even have an offensive TD the whole game.

Sometimes you get some crazy turnovers that turn into scores. AU got about a season's worth in that game. It happens sometimes.