Should Rutgers get a shot at the BCS National Championship

mrskippy · 11-12-2006, 04:21 PM

They are #7 in the AP rankings, defeated unbeated Louisville and look very good right now.

Ohio State and Michigan play Saturday. Loser gets a first loss. Winner gets automatic BCS title game shot.

So, should Rutgers get a shot at the winner of the Ohio State-Michigan game?

marc · 11-12-2006, 04:48 PM

Yes, if they run the table. I don't think they are going to run the table though so when they get clobbered on December 2nd, my vote will be no.

Sandy K · 11-12-2006, 04:48 PM

No.

Raderick · 11-12-2006, 04:50 PM

If they run the table and remain one of two undefeated teams, why not?

Jordan · 11-12-2006, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raderick

If they run the table and remain one of two undefeated teams, why not?

That's what I think. Theie non-conference schedule wasn't strong, but we did at one point, give BYU a national title on a bs schedule, no? I mean, they won the Holiday bowl, and were crowned national champs. So if they are undefeated, why not let them take on another undefeated to determine the worthy champion.

Jordan · 11-12-2006, 04:58 PM

I forgot to add, if Rutgers and OSU/Michigan end up the only undefeateds, and Rutgers doesnt go to tbe BCS National Title Game, then you might as well take away the guaranteed BCS bid from the Big East. If the computers are the end all be all in determining who plays where, then the Big East will never prosper, I don't think

marc · 11-12-2006, 04:58 PM

If they are going to have a system in place where 6 conferences are considered stronger than the others for no reason other than tradition, then if there are 2 undefeateds from those conferences, they need to play.

I don't think it's going to matter though because WVU is gonna beat them.

But having a BCS conference undefeated not get in over a 1 loss team would be about as ridiculous as giving USC a National title in 2004 when they didn't win the title game.

Jordan · 11-12-2006, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marc

If they are going to have a system in place where 6 conferences are considered stronger than the others for no reason other than tradition, then if there are 2 undefeateds from those conferences, they need to play.

I don't think it's going to matter though because WVU is gonna beat them.

But having a BCS conference undefeated not get in over a 1 loss team would be about as ridiculous as giving USC a National title in 2004 when they didn't win the title game.

Beat you too it..

marc · 11-12-2006, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan

Beat you too it..

Mine was better, I got a point in about USC's phantom NC in 04.

rudel.dietrich · 11-12-2006, 05:09 PM

Rutgers and national title should not even be in the same library and one another.
Much less in the same thread title

marc · 11-12-2006, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

Rutgers and national title should not even be in the same library and one another.
Much less in the same thread title

As long as they are going to keep the current system in place, then they certainly do belong together.

You can't come up with a system, have everyone agree to use it, and then not apply it.

mrskippy · 11-12-2006, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan

I forgot to add, if Rutgers and OSU/Michigan end up the only undefeateds, and Rutgers doesnt go to tbe BCS National Title Game, then you might as well take away the guaranteed BCS bid from the Big East. If the computers are the end all be all in determining who plays where, then the Big East will never prosper, I don't think

OSU and Michigan can't end up as undefeateds. One of them, by virtue of them playing each other next Saturday, will have a loss.

IMHO ... if Ruters goes undefeated, they should have a shot against OSU or Michigan.

Jordan · 11-12-2006, 05:16 PM

I know. That's why I put the slash

bababui · 11-12-2006, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

Rutgers and national title should not even be in the same library and one another.
Much less in the same thread title

"""

Quote:

But having a BCS conference undefeated not get in over a 1 loss team would be about as ridiculous as giving USC a National title in 2004 when they didn't win the title game.

Being a UCLA guy and hating USC more than the Taliban, I really have to disagree with this statement. SC was screwed in that year. The 'National Championship' game is a joke. They were penalized by the flawed computer ranking services. Auburn could have made the same argument the following year.

Without some sort of a playoff, its hard to say there is a definitive National Champ. Rutgers playing in place of USC, Florida, Ohio St/Michigan or even Texas or Cal is a travesty.

JDOldSchool · 11-12-2006, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marc

If they are going to have a system in place where 6 conferences are considered stronger than the others for no reason other than tradition, then if there are 2 undefeateds from those conferences, they need to play.

"

marc · 11-12-2006, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

"""

Being a UCLA guy and hating USC more than the Taliban, I really have to disagree with this statement. SC was screwed in that year. The 'National Championship' game is a joke. They were penalized by the flawed computer ranking services. Auburn could have made the same argument the following year.

Without some sort of a playoff, its hard to say there is a definitive National Champ. Rutgers playing in place of USC, Florida, Ohio St/Michigan or even Texas or Cal is a travesty.

You're missing the point. It would be like disregarding the Steelers last year and having an organization recognize the Colts as the real NFL champions.

Whether or not you believe the system is flawed or that USC got screwed is irrelevant.

Everyone agreed to use the BCS so the BCS title game needs to be what determines the National Championship until something else is established.

As a side note, the way Carroll whined through the media for over a month was pretty embarassing.

Lucas718 · 11-12-2006, 05:50 PM

The problem with the BCS is that when a team from a non-BCS conference goes undefeated and still has no shot to play in the title game. Boise St will probably be that team this year.

All of this could easily be fixed with a playoff system.

Jordan · 11-12-2006, 05:55 PM

Too bad money and coaches will always get in the way of how to crown a rightful national champion. Until then, I'm rooting for an OSU/Rutgers title game

marc · 11-12-2006, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucas718

The problem with the BCS is that when a team from a non-BCS conference goes undefeated and still has no shot to play in the title game. Boise St will probably be that team this year.

All of this could easily be fixed with a playoff system.

The thing is, it might not. Sure if you make it a 16 team playoff then it would never happen but there would also be ridiculously undeserving 3 loss teams playing for a National Title as well. I think if they go to a playoff it should be 8 teams MAX with some rule about an undefeated being automatically in.

Cooleyvol · 11-12-2006, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

Rutgers and national title should not even be in the same library and one another.
Much less in the same thread title

As much as the don't deserve it this year if they go undefeated, I don't understand your reasoning behind this statement.

View Poll Results: Should Rutgers get a shot at the BCS title game?
Yes	28	42.42%
No	21	31.82%
Maybe	17	25.76%
Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

11-12-2006, 04:21 PM	#1
mrskippy All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Northern California Posts: 1,011	Should Rutgers get a shot at the BCS National Championship They are #7 in the AP rankings, defeated unbeated Louisville and look very good right now. Ohio State and Michigan play Saturday. Loser gets a first loss. Winner gets automatic BCS title game shot. So, should Rutgers get a shot at the winner of the Ohio State-Michigan game?

11-12-2006, 04:48 PM	#2
marc Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 7,505	Yes, if they run the table. I don't think they are going to run the table though so when they get clobbered on December 2nd, my vote will be no. __________________

11-12-2006, 04:50 PM	#4
Raderick Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 2,737	If they run the table and remain one of two undefeated teams, why not? __________________

11-12-2006, 04:48 PM	#3
Sandy K Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 89	No.

11-12-2006, 04:58 PM	#6
Jordan Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Chi Suburbs now... Posts: 2,023	I forgot to add, if Rutgers and OSU/Michigan end up the only undefeateds, and Rutgers doesnt go to tbe BCS National Title Game, then you might as well take away the guaranteed BCS bid from the Big East. If the computers are the end all be all in determining who plays where, then the Big East will never prosper, I don't think

11-12-2006, 05:09 PM	#10
rudel.dietrich Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Zürich, Switzerland Posts: 8,608	Rutgers and national title should not even be in the same library and one another. Much less in the same thread title

11-12-2006, 05:16 PM	#13
Jordan Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Chi Suburbs now... Posts: 2,023	I know. That's why I put the slash

11-12-2006, 05:50 PM	#17
Lucas718 Major Leagues Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 402	The problem with the BCS is that when a team from a non-BCS conference goes undefeated and still has no shot to play in the title game. Boise St will probably be that team this year. All of this could easily be fixed with a playoff system.

11-12-2006, 05:55 PM	#18
Jordan Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Chi Suburbs now... Posts: 2,023	Too bad money and coaches will always get in the way of how to crown a rightful national champion. Until then, I'm rooting for an OSU/Rutgers title game