Thank Goodness the BCS picked Florida ...

I think Beenutt is on pretty solid ground with his statements. My two cents...

(1) I think the OSU/Texas game early in the season set the stage for the OSU hype. Texas really wasn't as good as they were without Vince Young, but coming fresh off winning the championship last year made it seem like OSU was a world beater when they won that game. By the time the bowl season rolled around, it took all Texas could muster to stave off Iowa. I give credit to OSU and Texas for scheduling that game, though. It was fun to watch two traditional powerhouses go at it to open the season.

(2) I can't speak for every Michigan fan, but some of the people I talked to were more upset with the process in the final week than the justice of the result. What I mean by that is I think it would have been very fair to drop Michigan down to 4 or 5 after the loss to OSU. I don't think there was much of an outcry when USC jumped over UM in the polls when USC beat Notre Dame the next week. The jump of Fla over UM the next week just seemed manufactured. Fla's close win over FSU and Arkansas didn't seem like signature wins. In retrospect, I agree that FLA belonged in the #2 spot, but the process would have seemed more reliable if the voters had placed USC and FLA above Michigan after the OSU game.

I'm not big on the 51 day layoff theory. If that were true, I have a hunch the Big Ten powers that be would find a way to stretch the season out a few more weeks, perhaps by starting a week later and including a bye week for each team.

You have to give credit where credit is due, congrats to Florida and the SEC. As for the Big Ten, I can't wait to see how the Wisconsin Badgers do next year. After beating Arkansas, they seem stronger than I thought they were. Especially with a first year coach. It will also be interesting to see if UM and OSU are able to rebound after two tough bowl losses.

[beenutt]

Good points COOP!

I want to make it clear that I'm not saying that the Big Ten is a poor football conference. They are good - solid teams. I have noticed that the upper teams of the Big Ten are overly hyped meaning primarily Ohio State, Michigan and psuedo member Notre Dame. How do you explain Ohio State being ranked number one at the beginning of the year after losing almost their whole defense to the pros and graduation? They beat Texas early so it seemed to solidify the notion that they were really that good. Then they beat the Big Ten teams and didn't even play Wisconsin. Once they got by Texas, they were double digit favorites till they got to the last game of the year! Week after week, they were 25 point favorites. They were talking about the Michigan game 5 weeks in advance because everyone knew that they did not have any competition. Compare that to Florida's schedule where they had to play Auburn, Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Kentucky, Alabama, South Carolina, Florida State plus and extra game with Arkansas to close out the year!

I heard an ESPN radio commentator admit this week that the ESPN bias to the Big Ten is real. ESPN has a TV contract with the Big Ten and ESPN has the biggest influence in college football. Just watch the TV and take notice of how many games are televised by ESPN and related networks. It is not a conspiracy theory - it is just a relationship that ESPN has with the Big Ten.

I watched a whole lot of college games this year with my son Kyle. I would watch the Big Ten games early in the afternoon on ESPN. I commented several times to Kyle that the action looked slow - the team speeds were slow. I would then watch the SEC games on Saturday night on CBS and the action looked much faster in general. The players were faster especially the upper teams : LSU and Florida. The PAC 10 teams also looked faster.

The Big 10 fans that I talk to are real football fans and do not make escuses. But the commentators after the game were giving all kind of excuses such as the layoff and the injury to Ted Ginn. This just reinforced the bias that I have noticed for some time now.

I'm just glad that the BCS went the way it did and that we were able to find out on the field who the best teams are.

beenutt

[btower06]

I'm like you after this I'm done with this. Boise st. should be national champs. they are undefeated and i thought that is what you have to do to win it all. next maybe the sec and the big 11 should do like they do in basketball and play each other.(acc ,big 11 challenge). then a lot of this would be settled. if more big conferences play each other instead of playing st. mothers of the poor then when it's all said and done you might have a lot of teams playing in the championship game with 2 losses. and i think Rome is a JERK. btower06

Is the man. (argument for our next thread All in fun, as always)

The BIG TEN really stunk up the joint this year only winning 2 outta 7 games, having only PENN STATE and WISCONSIN representing the power of the finest Conference in the NCAA.

That is why WE have to get the [NECFA] off the ground! 300 teams, 1 winner! "We can do this!" Then we can really SEE which Conference is the best and ultimately which team is the best.

We'll see Saturday how well the BIG TEN represent in our College Tourney.

[MplsTom]

They're both good conferences.

I get upset at the BCS because I think Wisconsin was clearly one of the best teams in the country and they got left out of the BCS.

For the second year in a row, they beat an SEC team in their bowl (Auburn last year, Arkansas this year) yet still they get dissed in the all-important "pre-season" polls.

I know coach Beilema is lobbying hard (which unfortunately coaches have to do) for next year's "pre-season" polls to have Wisconsin much higher so it isn't such a climb.

[46defense]

well put tom