Anyone notice that Pete Carrol is keeping his mouth shut and taking it like a man? He's smart, because Michigan is a damn good team, and could very well beat the Trojans.
The whole point of the "Super Bowl" matchup is to pit a clear-cut winner, right? Well, then the BCS ultimately would have decided the clear-cut winner should USC lose.
No, because the BCS had nothing to do with the Rose Bowl selection, or the Rose Bowl Game - hell this is a situation that could've happened pre-Bowl Alliance! The stated purpose of the BCS is only to match up the #1 and #2 teams in the nation - that is it. They did not do that this year.
Puedlfor is right. How can there be this "super bowl" matchup, if you still need to monitor the outcome of an entirely different game. That's not too super if you ask me. And, as both me and Puedlfor have already said... this year's scenario could have most definitley occured under the OLD system. The BCS was put in to avoid this situation... final.
Right now, UM vs. USC is looking like a damn good matchup in-and-of-itself. Under a playoff system, this year's Sugar and Rose Bowls would be the semi-finals, with the current (based on the voting polls) #1 USC vs. #4 Michigan, and #2 LSU vs. #3 OU. Regardless,both games will be fun to watch, but only one will REALLY matter... unless USC wins convincingly... and the Sugar Bowl is sloppily played... and the moon is in a crescent shape... and it only rains on odd numbered dates till January... etc. etc. etc. Actually, all this nonsenses is kinda fun.
One team had to be left out. I think USC has the weakest case out of the three. OU and LSU play in the two toughest conferences. The PAC10 is probably the weakest of the 6 major BCS conf. They lost to a 7-6 Cal team that finished 4th. I'm happy with OU and LSU matchup. Mike Tranghese is also the Big East Commissioner. It's no surprise he's clueless, seeing as his conference got raped by the ACC.
This will be a tough game for Michigan, but Michigan matches up well against UCS. Had it not for the ridiculous rugby punt formation and 2 blocked punts, they would be undefeated and headed for suger.
He is also keeping his mouth shut because he thinks (he might be right, especially if OU wins) that he can still share the NC. He is hoping for a replay for 1997--when Michigan got to share the #1 spot b/c they were the #1 ranked team going into the Bowls though everydody really knew Nebraska was the best team and real #1.
Just needling you I do think Nebraska was the best team that year but didn't have a problem with Michigan sharing it given they both went undefeated and had played some good competition. Now Howard winning the Heisman over Manning--it certainly didn't go to the best player and was do to the Michigan media/alum machine. If you haven't got it by now I love to needle Michigan and OSU. People that think Tex Exs are full of themsevelves haven't been in the Midwest or places where so many Midwesterners migrated to (West Coast). Those two teams alums in particular often think they are the U Texas or something and think they play in some kind of elite conference like the Big 12 or SEC.
Michigan has the chops to beat USC but they are notoriously bad in the Rose Bowl (mostly under Bo) and when traveling to the West Coast (see the Oregon game). Tranghese is an idiot from what I saw in the interview this morning. He just about tripped over himself trying to back peddle from the issue.
Yeah, I saw that too. Hasn't been a good year for Mike, overseeing the end of the Big East as a football conference & all. Ivan Maisel on espn.com said something along the lines of the 6 bcs commissioners make Bud Selig look like Churchill by comparison.
I hope OU gets stomped, but I get a feeling OU will roll... They need to show everyone they deserve the national championship and what better way to do it than embarress LSU...
but maybe you would've learned to spell and use proper grammar. as for the split in '97, i just had this conversation the other day with a huge um fan who goes to UT. now, i hated nebraska back then. hated. i would've loved nothing more than for missouri to have beaten them in that miracle 4th down play game, and i hated how they lobbied for the title, and was mad the coaches voted them #1, but in my heart i was glad michigan never had to play nebraska to prove who was #1. corn > maize that year. the children of the corn were a machine back then when they felt like playing hard (i.e. big games) and would've rolled michigan handily b/c michigan wouldn't have been able to keep up in scoring b/c no one stopped nebraska's option back then. but oh well, at least nebraska only got a split.
Are they using gold leaf or something in that diploma paper, I can't see any other reason why. Second thought, maybe Wolverines are know to study harder w/o the hot women and things to do in Austin.
Not sure. These are my deficiencies long before I got to the US. I doubt UT would have done much to change that.
My degree from Ann Arbor can possiblly land me a teaching job in UT, had it been from Austin, I would have to be much more exceptional to land a similar job in Ann Arbor. Like needling other schools and posters on a BBS?
