**Rose Bowl USC v Michigan thread**

[Scary_Tiger]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, you're right
I am stunned that MOV hurt Michigan

Ironically, it really is the humans that killed the Wolverines as the rules they instituted about MOV in the computer rankings kept Michigan from being ahead there as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

qft

[JupiterUWG]

michigan will not have played in 6 weeks to USC's 4 weeks plus it is a virtual home game for USC....dont underestimate these 2 things....i'm leaning toward thinking USC will win this game even though I believe is michigan is a soundly better team...if michigan can shake the rust in the first quarter and a half, theyll win

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
michigan will not have played in 6 weeks to USC's 4 weeks plus it is a virtual home game for USC....dont underestimate these 2 things....i'm leaning toward thinking USC will win this game even though I believe is michigan is a soundly better team...if michigan can shake the rust in the first quarter and a half, theyll win

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there really much difference between 4 weeks and 6? At a certain point it gets close to even. I'm mostly worried about the O-line. If they protect Henne and we can run reasonably well, we win, maybe comfortably. That's a big if though.

[jjp]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry they played at the Rose Bowl. There was a sea of Red at the game. Effectively it was slightly UCLA partial but not really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you there? Yes, there were a lot of USC fans, both end zones. But it was still easily 60:40 UCLA, maybe even 70:30

There are 28 sections in the Rose Bowl. Sections 1-9, 14-23, and 28 were UCLA. That's 20 sections out of 28. Throw in some USC fans in the UCLA sections and you get about 70% UCLA.

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry they played at the Rose Bowl. There was a sea of Red at the game. Effectively it was slightly UCLA partial but not really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you there? Yes, there were a lot of USC fans, both end zones. But it was still easily 60:40 UCLA, maybe even 70:30

There are 28 sections in the Rose Bowl. Sections 1-9, 14-23, and 28 were UCLA. That's 20 sections out of 28. Throw in some USC fans in the UCLA sections and you get about 70% UCLA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my. This argument is dumb (the whole thing, not this particular response). Does USC's loss become significantly less bad based on location or fan %? It's not a very good loss (although not necessarily a bad one, UCLA isn't that bad and it's a rivalry), I don't think being on the road makes that much of a difference. If you're a contender, you need to be able to beat a 6-5 team on the road.

[shemp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry they played at the Rose Bowl. There was a sea of Red at the game. Effectively it was slightly UCLA partial but not really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you there? Yes, there were a lot of USC fans, both end zones. But it was still easily 60:40 UCLA, maybe even 70:30

There are 28 sections in the Rose Bowl. Sections 1-9, 14-23, and 28 were UCLA. That's 20 sections out of 28. Throw in some USC fans in the UCLA sections and you get about 70% UCLA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my. This argument is dumb (the whole thing, not this particular response). Does USC's loss become significantly less bad based on location or fan %? It's not a very good loss (although not necessarily a bad one, UCLA isn't that bad and it's a rivalry), I don't think being on the road makes that much of a difference. If you're a contender, you need to be able to beat a 6-5 team on the road.

[/ QUOTE ]

I took it that the argument he is refuting is that it was a home game or effectively a home game.

edit: You want to argue that it doesn't matter (just so you know that I know).

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
You keep trying to discredit Wisconsin but sadly they are #6 in the BCS. I don't think there that good but according to the BCS neither are Arkansas, Tennessee, or Georgia, all teams Florida beat. LSU is still a very class.

What happens if Michigan stomps USC? Will that win not matter much either. Beating a 3 loss USC team, my gosh, they blow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it'd be interesting if Michigan stomped USC and Florida eeks one out over OSU.

Split title?

b

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You keep trying to discredit Wisconsin but sadly they are #6 in the BCS. I don't think there that good but according to the BCS neither are Arkansas, Tennessee, or Georgia, all teams Florida beat. LSU is still a very class.

What happens if Michigan stomps USC? Will that win not matter much either. Beating a 3 loss USC team, my gosh, they blow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it'd be interesting if Michigan stomped USC and Florida eeks one out over OSU.

Split title?

b

[/ QUOTE ]

No, and here's why. Putting aside any merit arguments, most voters who put Florida first will presumably put OSU 2nd (for beating Michigan). Michigan would be 3rd on most of their ballots (I could be wrong here). So for every 1st place vote Michigan gets, it has to displace the effect of being third on many ballots, a problem Florida will not have. So they have to get far more first place votes than Florida, and that is almost unfathomable.

Basically, it would have to be Oklahoma/Oregon as an ending, the game extremely poorly played throughout (very unlikely IMO), and Michigan absolutely wasting USC (also unlikely).

[Lennon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no, I happened to pick the last year I thought the big10 really sucked

just check the bowl games:
Rose #1 Michigan 21 #8 Washington St 16
hooray for you Michigan supporters
Sugar: Florida St 31 Ohio St 14
Citrus: Florida 21 Penn St 6
Outback: Georgia 33 Wisconsin 6
Sun: Arizona St 17 Iowa 7
Alamo: Purdue 33 Oklahoma St 20 ([img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Billy Dicken)
Aloha: Washington 51 Michigan St 23

oh yeah, if you include Pseudo-big10 Notre Dame
Independence: LSU 29 Notre Dame 7

[/ QUOTE ]


Right, Big Ten wasn't great at all, but part of it (and I want to stress, only part) includes the 2 BCS team thing. OSU (#2) went to play ACC#1 (and possibly the most talented team that year, FSU), so you had Big Ten #3 PSU (without Curtis Enis and Joe Jurivicious against SEC#2 Florida and Big Ten #5 (Purdue was tied for 2nd but wound up in the Alamo) Wisconsin against SEC#3 Georgia. Then Big Ten #6 Iowa played Pac Ten #3 in Arizona State.


[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

The Big Ten gets nicer bowls and nicer payouts because they travel well. They end up playing in stacked games against better competition. It proves nothing about the quality of the Big Ten teams.

This is the same phenomenon that has led to Notre Dame going 0-8 in their last 8 bowls.

Huge following + huge hype = huge payout + huge loss.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You keep trying to discredit Wisconsin but sadly they are #6 in the BCS. I don't think there that good but according to the BCS neither are Arkansas, Tennessee, or Georgia, all teams Florida beat. LSU is still a very class.

What happens if Michigan stomps USC? Will that win not matter much either. Beating a 3 loss USC team, my gosh, they blow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it'd be interesting if Michigan stomped USC and Florida eeks one out over OSU.

Split title?

b

[/ QUOTE ]

No, and here's why. Putting aside any merit arguments, most voters who put Florida first will presumably put OSU 2nd (for beating Michigan). Michigan would be 3rd on most of their ballots (I could be wrong here). So for every 1st place vote Michigan gets, it has to displace the effect of being third on many ballots, a problem Florida will not have. So they have to get far more first place votes than Florida, and that is almost unfathomable.

Basically, it would have to be Oklahoma/Oregon as an ending, the game extremely poorly played throughout (very unlikely IMO), and Michigan absolutely wasting USC (also unlikely).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if Florida beats OSU, and Mich decimates USC, people would take note of Michigan and put them at least 2nd.

True, it is unlikely. But wasn't LSU/USC splitting also unlikely?

b