Hypothetical Michigan/Florida question

If Michigan had played a 13th game, say against any other Big Ten team besides Ohio State this week, would it be going to the BCS title game and not Florida?

PS - I'm amazed that more isn't made of Florida's shoddy nonconference schedule: crap-ass Central Florida, very middling (bad, even?) Florida State, and a 2-9 Division I-AA team. At least Michigan beat a then-No. 2 Notre Dame at Notre Dame; Vanderbilt, a team from the "best conference in the country" and the MAC champion (41-17), plus another MAC team that lost each of its three games to Big Ten teams by 10 points or less.

Fire away.

 

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/threads/34702/

 

I think a good way of asking the question is, If there was a Big Ten Championship game played yesterday, on a neutral site, what would that havedone to the polls today? A big-Ten Championship game would have seen OSU and UM again, since the confrence isn't broken into divisions, like other confrences.

Under that kind of scenario, what would have happened?

In a feeble attempt to answer your question, I think it would be UM in the No. 2 spot.

BTW, did I hear correctly that someone on one of the analysis shows said that hte official line on a UM-UF game on a neutral site would have UM a 6 point favorite?

Sorry for the ranting on your thread, Questions.

 

OK, but say the Big 10 was split into divisions: Michigan, MSU, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Northwestern in the north; OSU, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Penn State and Team X in the South.
Michigan-OSU would meet in last regular season game AND in the Big Ten title.
Aand say in the Big 10 title game at Ford Field, Michigan wins by three.

Do the voters give Michigan-OSU a third meeting in three games?

 

A very good question. I doubt it.

 

Yes. I keep hearing all this talk of a rematch needing a third game if UM wins. This way, you'd have that third game. I think a OSU win by 3, followed by a UM win by 3 would make the teams 1a and 1b. A third game MUST be played.

It doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but since this is a hypothetical thread...

 

Yes, a third game must be played. But do the voters give it to them. They didnt this time. Michigan has already beat OSU on a neutral field....

 

Are we still in the hypo with UM winning on the neutral field? If so, I think any voter, truly voting for what is right, sees the OSU UM rerematch as the only option. THe 2 games would cancel due to the points scored and the fact that they split 2, what would have to be, hard fought games. Both would be one-loss. What, then would be the alternative to the third game?

 

either OSU/UM vs. Florida in the BS final...
And remember, it's not any neutral field, it's Ford Field. In Detroit. Where UM has never played.

 

Don't think field would matter. I suppose we have to have BigTen officials?

 

Using point spreads in any argument about the relative strength of two teams is completely irrelevant to the discussion. A bunch of mobbed-up bookies in Vegas setting a betting line to drive wagering has absolutely nothing to do with who is the better team. It's all about getting as many people to place a bet as possible.

 

Penn State was a 14-point underdog to the Canes 20 years ago. We saw how that turned out.