Don't look now

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:52 pm

Jacobs4Heisman wrote:
Dayons_Den wrote:
Jacobs4Heisman wrote:Florida number 2 in the coaches poll. Looks like OSU will get their cupcake.
That was the conventional wisdom for Miami, FL in '02 as well.
All I know is that if the line is less than 14 I'm laying big on OSU.

Shoot, I'll take the Fightin' Urbies straight up.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:18 pm

I think OSU is a better team, but I'd be real hard pressed to bet against Urbie. He's gonna have that group ready to play, and ready to prove something to the world. They may still lose, but I don't see them getting blown out.

FWIW, Urban's worst loss of his entire coaching career was last year against Alabama by 28 (31-3). His next worse loss was 22 here against USF (29-7). The only other loss in his coaching career by more than 2 TDs was the '02 UT game by 18 (42-24). He only has only lost by double digits 6 times in his coaching career.

I expect Urban to have some stuff up his sleeve that Tressel won't see coming. One things for sure, this should be a very well played football game. These guys usually have their teams nearly perfect fundamentally. The difference in the game will be that Smith is light years ahead of Leak.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:28 pm

redskins4ever wrote:Big Ten is weak comapred to the SEC, how can you blame the voters voting for a team who played a more challenging schedule, won those games, and rose to the occassion with 27 freshmen playing on their roster.

I don't blame them at all if that's why they voted the way they did. Michigan is a better team IMO, but Florida's resume is better, and they deserve to be there. The problem, as it's obviously illustrated by one voter even putting Florida #1, is that many voters set up their ballot in order to set up the game they wanted to see. That's bull.

kdog27 · Post by **kdog27** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 10:42 pm

The person who put Florida #1 should never be allowed to vote again. The only other team you can justify a #1 vote is Boise.

rollalong94 · Post by **rollalong94** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:21 am

These ballots (courtesy of michiganzone) blew my mind. Having Michigan 4th, behind Louisville?

As first reported on Michigan Sports Center, some of the Harris Poll ballots left a lot of people scratching their heads such as these shown below:

Paul Zeise:
No. 1: Ohio State No. 2: Louisville No. 3: Florida No. 4: Michigan
Larry Keech:
No. 1: Ohio State No. 2: Boise State No. 3: Michigan No. 4: Wisconsin No. 5: Florida
Robert Lawless:
No. 1: Ohio State No. 2: Michigan No. 3: Wisconsin No. 4: Louisville No. 5: Florida
Ray Melick:
No. 1: Ohio State No. 2: Florida No. 3: Louisville No. 4: Michigan
Tim Neverett:
No. 1: Ohio State No. 2: Florida No. 3: USC No. 4: Michigan
Gene Ponti:
No. 1: Ohio State No. 2: Florida No. 3: LSU No. 4: Michigan
Jim Walden:
No. 1: FloridaNo. 2: Ohio StateNo. 3: Michigan

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:36 am

It doesn't blow my mind. Some people were intentionally voting goofy to avoid a rematch.

IMO, any person who's ballot was not 1. OSU/Boise 2. OSU/UF/UM/Boise 3. UF/UM/Boise should be immediately interviewed on nat'l TV, and if they can't come up with damn good reasons/evidence as to why they voted the way they did, they should be banned from voting ever again.

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:44 am

If you can't win your conference, why should you be in the game? Also, Michigan had its chance to beat OSU and couldn't get the job done.

Those are great points, but that's not the system. Perhaps it should be the system, but it's not the system.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:52 am

It's like the coaches poll in '97, guys who voted Nebraska #1 and Michigan somewhere other than #2 to help the "Tom Osborne retirement fund". I don't think any of these wacky ballots would make a difference (you'd have to find 15-20 with a two-place difference between Michigan and Florida), but it's something that should be looked into.

I wonder if there were any ballots that went the other way, Michigan #2 and Florida something lower than #3??

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 8:35 pm

Some of the voters are admitting to violating their responsibility by casting fraudulent votes. Below is one example. They voted Florida 2nd not because they believe Florida is the 2nd best team, but because they didn't want to see a rematch. Can they now throw away this ridiculous sytem when the voters admit their lack of integrity?

"Michigan had its shot," said Harris voter Joe Biddle of The Tennessean. "If you replayed that game it would be nothing more than a Big Ten championship -- and I don't think you get mulligans in college football.

"If there's a viable alternative, I stay away from a rematch and I think Florida gives them a viable alternative."

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt ... &type=lgns

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 8:52 pm

It's impossible to completely get rid of polls. However, I'd like to see the coaches poll have more weight than the media poll.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:20 pm

I don't know -- the people in the Harris poll don't seem to "get" what voting should be about, and the coaches A: dont watch nearly enough football to be of use, and B: Have plenty of their own biases and reasons for voting one way or another. The computers don't have any common sense sometime, and some put too much weight on certain aspects.

Even if there is still just a 2-team playoff, why not appoint a formal selection committee to make the decision of who gets to go? They can use the polls and computers as a general guideline, just as the basketball selection committees do. Some years, their job would be easy, and other years, it will be extremely difficult. After they pick the championship opponents, the rest of the BCS bowls can have their pick as it is now.