PDA

View Full Version : Rose Bowl: Michigan-USC


Pages : 1 [2]

P-L
12-12-2006, 10:25 PM
I am singling Michigan out because they are the ones who are bitching about where they are...if they didn't want to be number 3 they should have beaten Ohio State...simple fact.

Second, you are right I would have been apalled if USC wasn't able to leap Michigan after being a mid season 1 loss team where as Michigan had just lost at the very end of the season and they lost to the same opponent they would have been playing in the title game.

I would be in favor of Michigan going to the title game if Ohio State wasn't going and they lost early than they did......hell, id even slightly consider giving Michigan a rematch had it had been a loss midway or beginning of the season to Ohio State but thats not how it went. They lost their final game (just like USC). Michigan and USC both deserve to be at the Rosebowl in my opinion. Michigan is not some special exception to the rule. thats BS

What rule? Where does the BCS say that you can't lose the last game of the season. Please link me to a site. You can't, because that's your opinion. Explain Oklahoma not winning their conference and getting smashed in the last game of the 2003 season, yet they got in. Florida lost to Florida State in the last game of the regular season in 1996. Guess which two teams played for the NC... Florida and Florida State. Not only is it not a rule, but there is precedent. You can have your own opinion and I'll have mine. But you are a hypocrite if you say you'd be upset if USC got screwed but Michigan fans aren't allowed to be upset. You may think that it is important to not lose late, I think a loss is a loss no matter when it come. You are more than free to have your own opinion, but don't tell us Michigan fans what our opinions should be and how we should feel.

danman253
12-12-2006, 10:25 PM
Wrong, I have watched Michigan outside of Ohio State...I havent been watching every single game but I have been following them.

Michigan owed their dominance to a pretty soft schedule. The only real big opponent they faced was Ohio State.

Beats ND on the road by 26. Beats wisconsin by 14 at home. Beats an underrated PSU team on the road pretty easily.

You beat:

ND and cal at home. Whoppee. You nearly lost to the state of washington, both games which i watched.

also what games have you watched?

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 10:25 PM
Cal, Oregon, Arkansas, Notre Dame...we probably played more ranked teams than Michigan did. Besides, im not making a case for USC to be number 2 right now but you on the other hand are pressing for Michigan

snuff
12-12-2006, 10:25 PM
what the hell does that mean? that was october! this is december...My bad was on the phone and thought I saw, would be pissed if USC didn't leap Michigan after being equal.

snuff
12-12-2006, 10:27 PM
Cal, Oregon, Arkansas, Notre Dame...we probably played more ranked teams than Michigan did. Besides, im not making a case for USC to be number 2 right now but you on the other hand are pressing for MichiganCal and Oregon fell off pretty much so I wouldn't say they are impressive.

We played Notre Dame.

Nebraska and PSU are about even in my opinion.

Arkansas is your most impressive win in my view, as you destroyed them, but that was with out team Mcfadden.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 10:27 PM
I think both teams deserve to be in the Rosebowl considering the circumstances

danman253
12-12-2006, 10:27 PM
Cal, Oregon, Arkansas, Notre Dame...we probably played more ranked teams than Michigan did. Besides, im not making a case for USC to be number 2 right now but you on the other hand are pressing for Michigan


Arkansas with a sub 50% McFadden. Congrats. Wisconsin is a better win than that.

Oregon? You seriously call that a quality win?

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 10:29 PM
Thats still more than Michigan did.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 10:31 PM
oh yeah, I forgot about Nebraska...them too.

we played a hell of a lot harder schedule than Michigan. Your only real big opponent was Ohio State. I am almost positive USC would be Wisconsin so thats not really any arguement to make.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:18 PM
Snuff - I laugh at your comment trying to call Cal a non threatening team

soybean
12-12-2006, 11:20 PM
Alright, let's put it this way, if tOSU loses to florida, are you michigan fans still gonna complain about not playing in the NC? What if you guys lose to USC, are you guys still gonna complain about not having been able to play in the NC? you guys aren't number 2 the rest of the world has got over it, so should you.

What is it you guys want? a plaque or trophy that says you guys are the 2nd best team in America? How bout instead of letting you guys have a rematch with tOSU, we just give you guys the NC?

I wanna give Ohio State the trophy and play Florida. That's what I want. Is that good enough for you? And don't for one second act like, if USC beat UCLA but Michigan got in the title game, you wouldn't be bitching. When people don't get what they want, they ***********... That's life for you. Don't you dare single us Michigan fans out as the only people who are complaining. Auburn fans bitched in 2004, USC fans bitched in 2003, Oregon fans bitched in 2001, Kansas State fans bitched in 1998, Miami fans bitched in 2000. See a trend? When people don't get what they want, they ***********. Get over it. If you don't like bitching, stop acknowledging people who ***********.

ive said repeatedly that i wouldnt mind if michigan played OSU in a rematch as long as USC plays florida, and that was way before they even played UCLA.

Basically what it comes down to is, what's done is done, we gotta get over it now. I do believe michigan deserved to be in the game, but they're not so what? we keep complaining?

snuff
12-12-2006, 11:20 PM
Snuff - I laugh at your comment trying to call Cal a non threatening teamThey lost to Arizona, I know they should of won, but still they lost to Arizona. Arizona doesn't even have an offense.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:22 PM
Oh, so great teams can't suffer upsets and still be great teams?

snuff
12-12-2006, 11:24 PM
Oh, so great teams can't suffer upsets and still be great teams?They almost lost to Stanford.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:25 PM
thats because they were down from losing to USC that kinda clinched their season for them - killed their PAC 10/Rosebowl hopes. cal is a very very good football team

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:33 PM
Cal is not good at all. PSU would whoop them and i can say that in confidence.

Also RW, we had the 3rd hardest schedule, in case you forgot.

soybean
12-12-2006, 11:41 PM
Cal is not good at all. PSU would whoop them and i can say that in confidence.

Also RW, we had the 3rd hardest schedule, in case you forgot.

dude, morelli sucks. Oh and also guys, we reached the threshold of stupidity by comparing each other's opponents.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:43 PM
I can't even have a civil arguement with you if you can't atleast admit Cal is a good team.

Also, Cal would beat Penn State. And I don't care what people say Michigan had a soft schedule compared to Florida, its indisputable

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:44 PM
Cal is not good at all. PSU would whoop them and i can say that in confidence.

Also RW, we had the 3rd hardest schedule, in case you forgot.

dude, morelli sucks. Oh and also guys, we reached the threshold of stupidity by comparing each other's opponents.


the rest of the team is solid.

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:45 PM
I can't even have a civil arguement with you if you can't atleast admit Cal is a good team.

Also, Cal would beat Penn State. And I don't care what people say Michigan had a soft schedule compared to Florida, its indisputable

They aren't. Who have they beaten that resembles a good team? Penn State has not either but they have lost to pretty good teams

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:46 PM
um the quarterback position is kind of an important position for any team

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:48 PM
Cal has far more weapons than Penn State and they dominated their conference with the exception of losing to USC and an upset against Arizona which only happened because Cal was preparing for USC instead of Arizona. Cal has far more weapons on their team than Penn State

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:48 PM
um the quarterback position is kind of an important position for any team


Its not the only one, and teams can win with a bad QB (see USC)

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:50 PM
Cal has far more weapons than Penn State and they dominated their conference with the exception of losing to USC and an upset against Arizona which only happened because Cal was preparing for USC instead of Arizona. Cal has far more weapons on their team than Penn State


Besides Jackson and Lynch who?

Also PSU has 5 times the defense of Cal. They would shut them down. Cal is not deserving of a top 25 rank, and they will be handled by TAMU

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:51 PM
Yeah, Booty is a bad quarterback thats why his stats are almost identical to Leinart's first year stats. Booty may have things he needs to work on but thats an ignorant statement.

Second, why are we even talking about USC, the whole arguement was that Michigan isn't number 2

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:52 PM
Nate Longshore, Justin Forsett?

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:52 PM
Yeah, Booty is a bad quarterback thats why his stats are almost identical to Leinart's first year stats. Booty may have things he needs to work on but thats an ignorant statement.

Second, why are we even talking about USC, the whole arguement was that Michigan isn't number 2
Booty continues to buckle under pressure, I can name 10-15 guys i'd take over him.

His WR make him better than he is.

Leinaart made the clutch play, Botty will NEVER do that

danman253
12-12-2006, 11:53 PM
Nate Longshore, Justin Forsett?


Longshore is ok. Forsett over Hunt? Nice try.

RWFender1
12-12-2006, 11:56 PM
Forsett is good...

Lynch over Hunt? hell yes.

Longshore over Morelli..hell yes again

Booty is learning. Im a big Mark Sanchez fan but I stand by John David because if I didnt I wouldnt be fully supporting what is going on with the team right now.

soybean
12-13-2006, 12:13 AM
Forsett is good...

Lynch over Hunt? hell yes.

Longshore over Morelli..hell yes again

Booty is learning. Im a big Mark Sanchez fan but I stand by John David because if I didnt I wouldnt be fully supporting what is going on with the team right now.

Im in the same boat as you. It's kinda sad that booty was forced to live in palmer and leinart's shadow. Hopefully next year he'll be a lot better. Kinda wish USC still had norm chow...

slightlyaraiderfan
12-13-2006, 12:54 AM
Good one danman, you get upset when someone calls you "sparky" then you call another poster dumb?


Irarely listen to you, you hate me so your posts are worthless
I could careless if you listen to me or not, stop being a hypocrite.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:07 AM
i heard norm chow was going back to college football. i hope he comes back to USC but i doubt it since he probably will be looking for a head coaching position.

booty has had some shakey games but he has also played some great games. even the oregon state game which was a losing game, booty showed a lot of determination and wasnt going to give up. he marched the team right down the field and almost tied the ball game up which probably would have lead to a win for USC as they had the momentum.

im not giving up on a booty, i think hes capable of a lot but they just need to work him.

soybean
12-13-2006, 01:29 AM
i heard norm chow was going back to college football. i hope he comes back to USC but i doubt it since he probably will be looking for a head coaching position.

booty has had some shakey games but he has also played some great games. even the oregon state game which was a losing game, booty showed a lot of determination and wasnt going to give up. he marched the team right down the field and almost tied the ball game up which probably would have lead to a win for USC as they had the momentum.

im not giving up on a booty, i think hes capable of a lot but they just need to work him.

yeah, people forget that they were down 33-10 towards the end of the 3rd quarter, booty scored 21 unanswered points for them. If it werent for their freakin automatic kicker and chauncey washington's dumb fumble, they woulda had that game. But they still woulda been left out of the NC i think, because of the UCLA loss, which i woulda been fine with.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:37 AM
yeah..i agree.. oregon state should have turned into a win but UCLA was just bad news. its all good though, this is a rebuilding year and they will come out strong next year. overall im pretty impressed with this season considering how many freshman we have and how many injuries we had. now if we just beat michigan in the rosebowl that will be the icing on the cake to a pretty good season overall

snuff
12-13-2006, 01:37 AM
Sorry I missed the mindless rubble being posted here, but you don't need a good QB to be good, at least not in the SEC.

Eric Ainge? Trash.
Jamarcus Russel? Good prospect, but not great since he turns the ball over 15 times a game.
Auburn? I don't even know who their QB is.
Arkansas? No explination here.
Florida? Decent enough to win a conference i guess.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:40 AM
haha well a lot of times in the redzone McFadden IS the quarterback for Arkansas. And Florida's QB must be doing something right if he led them into a national championship game...a team couldn't accomplish as much as they did without at least a "good" quarterback

MagnumGator
12-13-2006, 06:06 AM
Florida lost to Florida State in the last game of the regular season in 1996. Guess which two teams played for the NC... Florida and Florida State. Not only is it not a rule, but there is precedent. You can have your own opinion and I'll have mine. But you are a hypocrite if you say you'd be upset if USC got screwed but Michigan fans aren't allowed to be upset. You may think that it is important to not lose late, I think a loss is a loss no matter when it come. You are more than free to have your own opinion, but don't tell us Michigan fans what our opinions should be and how we should feel.

This, my friend, you couldn't be more wrong about. 1996 was pre-BCS. When Florida lost to Florida State, they DROPPED. Big difference. Florida went on and won the SEC and went to the Sugar Bowl where they were matched up with th ACC champions, Florida State. This was the Sugar Bowl, not the national champion game. Meanwhile 1-loss Nebraska was ranked ahead of Florida but lost to Texas in the Big XII championship game so Florida got help there. Over in the Rose Bowl undefeated Arizona State was playing 1-loss Ohio State. If Arizona State had beaten OSU, the Sun Devils would have been national champs regardless of what Florida did in the Sugar Bowl. Likewise if OSU had won by more than 3 and Florida won by less than 32, it is entirely possible OSU could have been voted champs by being the most impressive 1-loss team. In closing, 1996 was completely different than 2006 because 1.) Florida dropped after losing, 2.) other teams ahead of Florida lost allowing Florida to move back up, and 3.) Florida did not play in the "national championship game" other teams still had a shot up until New Year's Day. Any questions?

BuckeyeNation27
12-13-2006, 07:50 AM
Did Michigan really have the #3 ranked SoS? That's a VERY good argument for getting rid of that pointless "stat" once and for all.

Listen, I think Michigan is a very good team this year, and they are my #2 team. I think if they played USC with emotion and traveling distance thrown out the window, they would win by anywhere between 3-10 points.

But Michigan did not go through the 3rd hardest schedule in the country. They had 1 tough opponent in Ohio State. Wisconsin is overrated beyond belief. Notre Dame is the definition of overrated. The rest of the Big10 was down. Penn State's defense is very good, but their offense is pathetic. A good coach can beat them with ease.

I'm not trying to dog on Michigan, I just don't think they had that tough of a schedule. Aside from Texas and Michigan, neither did Ohio State.

danman253
12-13-2006, 10:57 AM
I'm positive michigan had the #3 SOS, but you do make a good point that it is a bit inflated. Still. Its tougher than SCs, whose toughest opponent was basically without its heisman candidate the whole ga,e.

danman253
12-13-2006, 10:58 AM
Sorry I missed the mindless rubble being posted here, but you don't need a good QB to be good, at least not in the SEC.

Eric Ainge? Trash.
Jamarcus Russel? Good prospect, but not great since he turns the ball over 15 times a game.
Auburn? I don't even know who their QB is.
Arkansas? No explination here.
Florida? Decent enough to win a conference i guess.
Penn State also is another team who is good but has one of the worst QBs around in Anthony Morelli.

Also, how about Georgia Tech with Reggie Ball?

Xonraider
12-13-2006, 11:56 AM
Sorry I missed the mindless rubble being posted here, but you don't need a good QB to be good, at least not in the SEC.

Eric Ainge? Trash.
Jamarcus Russel? Good prospect, but not great since he turns the ball over 15 times a game.
Auburn? I don't even know who their QB is.
Arkansas? No explination here.
Florida? Decent enough to win a conference i guess.
Penn State also is another team who is good but has one of the worst QBs around in Anthony Morelli.

Also, how about Georgia Tech with Reggie Ball?

Both of them suck monkey balls.

danman253
12-13-2006, 12:03 PM
Sorry I missed the mindless rubble being posted here, but you don't need a good QB to be good, at least not in the SEC.

Eric Ainge? Trash.
Jamarcus Russel? Good prospect, but not great since he turns the ball over 15 times a game.
Auburn? I don't even know who their QB is.
Arkansas? No explination here.
Florida? Decent enough to win a conference i guess.
Penn State also is another team who is good but has one of the worst QBs around in Anthony Morelli.

Also, how about Georgia Tech with Reggie Ball?

Both of them suck monkey balls.

Exactly my point, and yet both play in january bowl games. So know, u do not need a good QB to be successful

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 12:34 PM
dream on danman..no way Michigan had a harder schedule than USC. Probably at least half the teams USC played were ranked teams when they played them. they played Cal, Oregon, Notre Dame, Arkansas, Nebraska and a lot of the PAC 10 teams they played such as Arizona State were ranked at the time. Both USC and Michigan played an overrated Notre Dame. And then Michigan's only real opponent was Ohio State which they couldn't beat...besides i dont know how many times i have to repeat myself, my whole arguement is Florida deserves to be the number 2 team right now over Michigan and you can't argue Florida didn't play a tougher schedule

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 12:40 PM
Also Darren McFadden wasn't a heisman canidate at the time USC played them just to clarify

danman253
12-13-2006, 12:40 PM
dream on danman..no way Michigan had a harder schedule than USC. Probably at least half the teams USC played were ranked teams when they played them. they played Cal, Oregon, Notre Dame, Arkansas, Nebraska and a lot of the PAC 10 teams they played such as Arizona State were ranked at the time. Both USC and Michigan played an overrated Notre Dame. And then Michigan's only real opponent was Ohio State which they couldn't beat...besides i dont know how many times i have to repeat myself, my whole arguement is Florida deserves to be the number 2 team right now over Michigan and you can't argue Florida didn't play a tougher schedule


ANd you have played who? Lets break it down .

Michigan:

ND
Wisconsin
Penn State
Iowa
Minnesota

USC:
ND
Arkansas
Nebraska
Cal
Oregon

-Michigan was more impressive ON THE ROAD vs. ND.
- Arkansas was without McFadden basically, so Michigan gets another edge
- Penn State=Nebraska
-Cal is overrated but so is Iowa, so I give the edge to Cal
-Oregon>Minnesota

But lets look at losses:

USC loses to Oregon Sate and UCLA, Michigan loses to OSU.

hmmmmmmm, yeah, Michigan has a harder schedule.

danman253
12-13-2006, 12:41 PM
Also Darren McFadden wasn't a heisman canidate at the time USC played them just to clarify

Jesus christ were you dropped on your head? He still is there best player coming into this year and was pretty well known by people who know about college football, so that excludes you i guess.

danman253
12-13-2006, 12:42 PM
Also i have always, ALWAYS said UF played a harder schedule.

My arguement is how the two played. Michigan was dominant in every game but OSU, Florida escaped out of 2 games.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:08 PM
you are homer defined. minnesota and iowa suck. i'll throw you a bone with penn state. wisconsin i'll give you even though i think they are far overrated. so that leaves you with a decent penn state team, wisconsin and ohio state who you lost to. if you put michigan in say the SEC they would have probably lost 2 games. again, i dont know if you think you are getting to me by saying USC isn't the number 2 team since you keep bringing them up. i never argued they deserve to be number 2 so stop whining

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:09 PM
you are homer defined. minnesota and iowa suck. i'll throw you a bone with penn state. wisconsin i'll give you even though i think they are far overrated. so that leaves you with a decent penn state team, wisconsin and ohio state who you lost to. if you put michigan in say the SEC they would have probably lost 2 games. again, i dont know if you think you are getting to me by saying USC isn't the number 2 team since you keep bringing them up. i never argued they deserve to be number 2 so stop whining
I said Iowa and Minnesota suck.

And who exactly in the SEC would we lose to? I'm listening.

With Floridas schedule i bet Michigan would be unbeaten if that is what you are getting at.

soybean
12-13-2006, 01:12 PM
Also i have always, ALWAYS said UF played a harder schedule.

My arguement is how the two played. Michigan was dominant in every game but OSU, Florida escaped out of 2 games.

well...ball state, but that's an arguement for another day.

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:14 PM
Also i have always, ALWAYS said UF played a harder schedule.

My arguement is how the two played. Michigan was dominant in every game but OSU, Florida escaped out of 2 games.

well...ball state, but that's an arguement for another day.

We were up by 3 scores heading into the 4th quarter and put in backups for the majority of the 4th.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:14 PM
you would probably lose to any random team in the SEC since its a much more rugged schedule than the Big 10...its a far more strenus schedule than the big 10 and i cant see michigan making it out of the SEC untouched

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:17 PM
the thing that pisses me off here is i get the feeling a lot of michigan fans still believe they are even better than ohio state after losing.

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:19 PM
you would probably lose to any random team in the SEC since its a much more rugged schedule than the Big 10...its a far more strenous schedule than the big 10 and i cant see michigan making it out of the SEC untouched
Like who? Michigan would not lose at home number 1, so lets look at UFs schedule shall we?

Biggest 3 road games:
at Tennesse
at Auburn
at FSU

Biggest 3 Home Games:
LSU
Georgia
South Carolina

As I aid i doubt we drop one at home, Tennesse would scare me more tha auburn IMO. I still think Michigan could go unbeaten with that schedule.

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:20 PM
the thing that pisses me off here is i get the feeling a lot of michigan fans still believe they are even better than ohio state after losing.


What? Name one person who has said that.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:21 PM
i think arkansas could give michigan a run for their money.

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:22 PM
i think arkansas could give michigan a run for their money.How?

Michigan has the best run defense in the nation, and if you shut down the run, you need the QB to beat you. OSU was able to run because of a balanced attack. Michigan would just stack the box on Arkansas, and make CASEY DICK beat them. Casey dick cannot single handidly beat anyone.

LSU and Tennessee have better shots to beat Michigan than Arkansas.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:23 PM
well all this complaining about how you deserve more than where you are at and how you feel you deserve a rematch even though Ohio State already settled the score between both teams...its indirectly implied

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:23 PM
then mcfadden could line up as a qb and start throwing deep against michigan

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:25 PM
if USC beats Michigan will you stop complaining about what could have been or will you keep this sherade going?

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:26 PM
well all this complaining about how you deserve more than where you are at and how you feel you deserve a rematch even though Ohio State already settled the score between both teams...its indirectly implied

What? I don't think Michigan would win in a rematch but it be a better game than florida.

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:27 PM
if USC beats Michigan will you stop complaining about what could have been or will you keep this sherade going?


If they lose of course I will, but seeing as how i doubt that happens...

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:28 PM
then mcfadden could line up as a qb and start throwing deep against michigan
What? McFadden doesn't throw it deep, he throw the intermediates. Notice what happened when he thrw it deep on UF?

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:32 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

danman253
12-13-2006, 01:35 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I hate this "didn't win your conference" BS. Michigan would have prolly won any other conference, and the only team they lose to is the number 1 team in football. We lose to OSU on the road, and by 3, and give them all they can handle. On a neautral site or at Michigan this may be a different story.

BuckeyeNation27
12-13-2006, 01:39 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I hate this "didn't win your conference" BS. Michigan would have prolly won any other conference, and the only team they lose to is the number 1 team in football. We lose to OSU on the road, and by 3, and give them all they can handle. On a neautral site or at Michigan this may be a different story.Doubtful on that. There wasn't much home field advantage. Was there a play that Henne didn't audible out of?

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:39 PM
haha you confirmed my point...everything you said in that last post shows how michigan fans indirectly imply they are better than ohio state even after being beaten. accept the fact that you lost and move on. you're at the rosebowl.

P-L
12-13-2006, 01:52 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I'll let you in on a little secret. Florida didn't get through the SEC undefeated. *gasp* I know, it might be hard to believe but they lost too. Also, the BCS doesn't require you to win your conference. In fact, in the last 5 BCS games, 2 of them included a team that didn't win their conference.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 01:56 PM
you lost to ohio state already. nobody wants to see them play michigan again except for MICHIGAN FANS. they had their shot and blew it. florida hasn't played them yet and they are in the same boat as michigan and they won their conference. and who are you to say that they wont play a better game against ohio state than michigan? thats shear arrogance my friend

slightlyaraiderfan
12-13-2006, 02:10 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I hate this "didn't win your conference" BS. Michigan would have prolly won any other conference, and the only team they lose to is the number 1 team in football. We lose to OSU on the road, and by 3, and give them all they can handle. On a neautral site or at Michigan this may be a different story.Doubtful on that. There wasn't much home field advantage. Was there a play that Henne didn't audible out of?
OSU also gave them a ton of chances, how many times did the Buckeyes turn the ball over? While Michigan had no turnovers.

P-L
12-13-2006, 02:20 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I hate this "didn't win your conference" BS. Michigan would have prolly won any other conference, and the only team they lose to is the number 1 team in football. We lose to OSU on the road, and by 3, and give them all they can handle. On a neautral site or at Michigan this may be a different story.Doubtful on that. There wasn't much home field advantage. Was there a play that Henne didn't audible out of?
OSU also gave them a ton of chances, how many times did the Buchkeyes turn the ball over? While Michigan had no turnovers.

So turnovers don't count? Michigan held onto the ball and made few mistakes. Yet your going to hold that against them? Michigan also gave OSU some chances with penalties...

BuckeyeNation27
12-13-2006, 02:22 PM
Don't knock Michigan or disagree with a Michigan poster or warnings will be handed out.

snuff
12-13-2006, 02:25 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I hate this "didn't win your conference" BS. Michigan would have prolly won any other conference, and the only team they lose to is the number 1 team in football. We lose to OSU on the road, and by 3, and give them all they can handle. On a neautral site or at Michigan this may be a different story.Doubtful on that. There wasn't much home field advantage. Was there a play that Henne didn't audible out of?
OSU also gave them a ton of chances, how many times did the Buckeyes turn the ball over? While Michigan had no turnovers.Michigan didn't turn it over,but they made so stupid plays that cost them probabl 14 point swing.

How could you argue there was no home field advantage? Idiot comment...

The main problem in the game was the field, for both teams. WR's could cut knowing when and dbs had to react and hope to get footing. I think it would be a completely different game if they played again, although I don't know who would win.

AND Fender stop writing 1 line per post and then posting 3 times in a row.... You can use the edit button or you can write a whole! paragraph every once in a while.

BuckeyeNation27
12-13-2006, 02:29 PM
What was so idiotic about it? The noise obviously had no effect on Henne, and we don't paint our lockers pink.

P-L
12-13-2006, 02:29 PM
you lost to ohio state already. nobody wants to see them play michigan again except for MICHIGAN FANS. they had their shot and blew it. florida hasn't played them yet and they are in the same boat as michigan and they won their conference. and who are you to say that they wont play a better game against ohio state than michigan? thats shear arrogance my friend

When did I say that? You are putting words into my mouth. Maybe some Michigan fans said something like that, but I never said anything like that. But at the same time it's just as arrogant of you if you are saying Florida will play a better game against Ohio State. We don't know, so we can't say either way.

So your only real argument is that YOU don't want to see a rematch. I have friends that are OSU fans and Michigan State fans that want to see a rematch. I think it's very arrogant to assume Michigan fans are the only ones who want a rematch. I know the majority of this board doesn't want one, but only a small fraction of college football fans post on this board.

slightlyaraiderfan
12-13-2006, 02:35 PM
any how, i just dont see how Michigan would make it through the entire SEC without suffering an upset and i stand by that.

and why is it that you deserve a rematch when you didnt win your conference and didn' t beat ohio state the first time? give florida a chance, they earned to be where they are despite whether you think it will be as good of a game or not going into it

I hate this "didn't win your conference" BS. Michigan would have prolly won any other conference, and the only team they lose to is the number 1 team in football. We lose to OSU on the road, and by 3, and give them all they can handle. On a neautral site or at Michigan this may be a different story.Doubtful on that. There wasn't much home field advantage. Was there a play that Henne didn't audible out of?
OSU also gave them a ton of chances, how many times did the Buckeyes turn the ball over? While Michigan had no turnovers.Michigan didn't turn it over,but they made so stupid plays that cost them probabl 14 point swing.

How could you argue there was no home field advantage? Idiot comment...

The main problem in the game was the field, for both teams. WR's could cut knowing when and dbs had to react and hope to get footing. I think it would be a completely different game if they played again, although I don't know who would win.
Did I say there was no home field advantage? I said OSU turned the ball over 3 times, 2 were gifts. Which is something typical of the visiting team to do.

snuff
12-13-2006, 02:37 PM
BuckeyeNation27 said there was no home field advantage.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 02:45 PM
oh so its okay for danman to post 3 times in a row though?

Ohio State won the game so its irrelevant for Michigan fans to even argue an alternative scenario. A loss is a loss i dont care if its by 1 point

BuckeyeNation27
12-13-2006, 02:47 PM
BuckeyeNation27 said there was no home field advantage.still waiting

soybean
12-13-2006, 03:02 PM
All this talk is nonsense because florida is gonna beat OSU.

snuff
12-13-2006, 03:43 PM
BuckeyeNation27 said there was no home field advantage.still waiting For what?

You measure home field advantage in how easy it is for Henne to get off a play call? Give me a break there are many factors.

Maybe Henne was a little rattled because of the pressure early, causing him to over throw a wide open Manningham?

Maybe Troy Smith was really comfortable with 100k people supporting him?

Maybe Michigan was trying to do big things to offset the crowd and f-ed up, maybe the crowd making noise got a false start or an extra call?

Theres all kinds of stuff factored into home field advantage, and to say it had no effect on the game is idiotic, but from what you have posted so far, and many other tosu fans on here, it is to be expected.

BuckeyeNation27
12-13-2006, 03:47 PM
BuckeyeNation27 said there was no home field advantage.still waiting For what?

You measure home field advantage in how easy it is for Henne to get off a play call? Give me a break there are many factors.

Maybe Henne was a little rattled because of the pressure early, causing him to over throw a wide open Manningham?

Maybe Troy Smith was really comfortable with 100k people supporting him?

Maybe Michigan was trying to do big things to offset the crowd and f-ed up, maybe the crowd making noise got a false start or an extra call?

Theres all kinds of stuff factored into home field advantage, and to say it had no effect on the game is idiotic, but from what you have posted so far, and many other tosu fans on here, it is to be expected.Well considering that I never said it had NO EFFECT at all..... :roll:


Yes everything I've posted here has been idiotic and just plain stupid. I'm actually just making things up for the fun of it. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

MagnumGator
12-13-2006, 04:06 PM
Also, the BCS doesn't require you to win your conference. In fact, in the last 5 BCS games, 2 of them included a team that didn't win their conference.

And both those teams lost in the BCS game so I don't see how this is helping your case.

Namy
12-13-2006, 04:56 PM
Michigan is better on paper... but I have a feeling that USC's speed offensively and defensively will just surprise Michigan. I think USC will jump out to quick, large early lead.. and that Michigan will try to rally w/Henne but fall short. Just a "gut" feeling

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 05:06 PM
thats how i see it too. USC just played their last game against UCLA and are used to the Rosebowl since they were just there and i'd say probably 75 percent of the crowd will be USC fans. I also see Chad Henne running for his life like Brady Quinn after he looks up and sees none of his recievers will be open

P-L
12-13-2006, 05:06 PM
Also, the BCS doesn't require you to win your conference. In fact, in the last 5 BCS games, 2 of them included a team that didn't win their conference.

And both those teams lost in the BCS game so I don't see how this is helping your case.

Again, why does it matter? They got to the Championship game. I'm not trying to convince people that Michigan would win the NC, I'm trying to convince people that they belong there. It doesn't matter what Oklahoma and Nebraska did in the game, what matters is that they got there. It's a fact if the BCS had such a problem with teams not winning their conference making it to the game, they'd make a it a requirement. But after happening twice before they haven't done anything about it. I don't know why you are attempting to argue with me. Your and Florida fan and I'm a Michigan fan, we aren't going to change each others minds.

RWFender1
12-13-2006, 05:10 PM
usually winning your conference implies you're good enough to be national championship worthy...they kinda go hand in hand. i think it SHOULD be a rule that if you dont win your conference that you dont belong there

P-L
12-13-2006, 05:32 PM
usually winning your conference implies you're good enough to be national championship worthy...they kinda go hand in hand. i think it SHOULD be a rule that if you dont win your conference that you dont belong there

Ok, maybe it should but it's not. Can we get back to talking about the game? The only reason us Michigan fans are still complaing is because all you other people keep bringing it up. Let's talk about the Rose Bowl.

danman253
12-14-2006, 01:18 AM
What was so idiotic about it? The noise obviously had no effect on Henne, and we don't paint our lockers pink.
Henne is one of the most poised QBs in the NCAA.

danman253
12-14-2006, 01:21 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.

As for Michigan on offense, they will run the usual offense. Hart will have a big day and Manningham's double step is too good for SCs DBs.

Michigan 28
USC 14

soybean
12-14-2006, 01:31 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.

As for Michigan on offense, they will run the usual offense. Hart will have a big day and Manningham's double step is too good for SCs DBs.

Michigan 28
USC 14

The only thing with manningham though is that now people KNOW who mario manningham is. When they played Notre Dame no one knew who he was so they didnt prepare for him. Because of that he snuck up on them and had an amazing game. USC and everyone else knows who he is now so they just need to double cover him with taylor mays.

Also USC can stop the run pretty good.

With all that said and done, i really really hope USC can win this, but im not overly optomistic and im not gonna make any predictions, both schools are too good. it'll be a good game, i hope. good luck wolverines.

danman253
12-14-2006, 01:34 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.

As for Michigan on offense, they will run the usual offense. Hart will have a big day and Manningham's double step is too good for SCs DBs.

Michigan 28
USC 14

The only thing with manningham though is that now people KNOW who mario manningham is. When they played Notre Dame no one knew who he was so they didnt prepare for him. Because of that he snuck up on them and had an amazing game. USC and everyone else knows who he is now so they just need to double cover him with taylor mays.

Also USC can stop the run pretty good.

With all that said and done, i really really hope USC can win this, but im not overly optomistic and im not gonna make any predictions, both schools are too good. it'll be a good game, i hope. good luck wolverines.

Well if Henne had not overthrown Manningham last game he'd have another td, since he destroyed smith on that play. However if he is double covered the way Arrington has stepped up i am confident.

Its really hard to say whether or not michigan will be stopped on the run. The zone scheme has worked wonders this year, against teams like Penn State, Wisconsin, and OSU Michigan was very successful on the ground.

I do not think by any means michigan will run it up, i just think Michigan is not gonna allow USC into any rythm.

slightlyaraiderfan
12-14-2006, 01:36 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.
Againist UCLA, they went up againist probably the fastest set of DEs in college football. SC struggled aganist that all season, and even more aganist the Bruins becuase it came from both sides. Michigan creates a lot of pressure, but it's a different type of pressure.

danman253
12-14-2006, 01:38 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.
Againist UCLA, they went up againist probably the fastest set of DEs in college football. SC struggled aganist that all season, and even more aganist the Bruins becuase it came from both sides. Michigan creates a lot of pressure, but it's a different type of pressure.

The thing is that Michigan can bring prseeure from both inside and outside. They were in Troy Smiths face all day, but smiths poise and accuracy made the difference. I do not see this in JDB.

One matchup that should be interesting is Mark Bihl vs. Sedrick Ellis. Ellis was in on UCLAs center (dunno the name) all day and it will be important for Bihl to contain him.

soybean
12-14-2006, 01:50 AM
I thought you said kevin ellison so i was gonna post this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=hZxRioJDms4

got him mixed up with sedrick ellis.

Xonraider
12-14-2006, 01:55 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.

As for Michigan on offense, they will run the usual offense. Hart will have a big day and Manningham's double step is too good for SCs DBs.

Michigan 28
USC 14

I doubt we score 4 TDs, I doubt there is 6 TDs in the game for that matter. I see it more like a 20-13, many stops by both teams near the 30 - 50 yard range.

RWFender1
12-14-2006, 02:16 AM
im not too concerned about hart rushing a lot. USC has a really fast defense and there has not been one team that has ran all over us this season. we shut down marshawn lynch and oregon's fast offense with 2 scrambling qb's and jonathan stewart in the backfield. they will just need to continue to bring constant pressure on henne and not allow him to sit back and throw

BuckeyeNation27
12-14-2006, 07:41 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.
Againist UCLA, they went up againist probably the fastest set of DEs in college football. SC struggled aganist that all season, and even more aganist the Bruins becuase it came from both sides. Michigan creates a lot of pressure, but it's a different type of pressure.

The thing is that Michigan can bring prseeure from both inside and outside. They were in Troy Smiths face all day, but smiths poise and accuracy made the difference. I do not see this in JDB.

One matchup that should be interesting is Mark Bihl vs. Sedrick Ellis. Ellis was in on UCLAs center (dunno the name) all day and it will be important for Bihl to contain him.all day?

danman253
12-14-2006, 10:12 AM
Back to the game. I really, REALLY doubt USC will get enough time to pass it to their guys. Look at last game. Jarrett had an awful game because Booty had no time. Michigan will be in their face all day. I doubt USC gets more the 17 points.
Againist UCLA, they went up againist probably the fastest set of DEs in college football. SC struggled aganist that all season, and even more aganist the Bruins becuase it came from both sides. Michigan creates a lot of pressure, but it's a different type of pressure.

The thing is that Michigan can bring prseeure from both inside and outside. They were in Troy Smiths face all day, but smiths poise and accuracy made the difference. I do not see this in JDB.

One matchup that should be interesting is Mark Bihl vs. Sedrick Ellis. Ellis was in on UCLAs center (dunno the name) all day and it will be important for Bihl to contain him.all day?

Yeah i recall on nearly every play Woodley, Branch, and Biggs were in Smiths face.

danman253
12-14-2006, 10:13 AM
im not too concerned about hart rushing a lot. USC has a really fast defense and there has not been one team that has ran all over us this season. we shut down marshawn lynch and oregon's fast offense with 2 scrambling qb's and jonathan stewart in the backfield. they will just need to continue to bring constant pressure on henne and not allow him to sit back and throw
Michigans OL is a lot better than those two teams though.

That is going to be a key matchup. If Hart gets over 100 Michigan will win this game no doubt.

DoWnThEfiElD
12-14-2006, 10:22 AM
I love when the Mich gameplan is run left

RWFender1
12-14-2006, 02:14 PM
did they announce a spread for this game yet?

P-L
12-14-2006, 02:22 PM
did they announce a spread for this game yet?

One site I've seen has Michigan -1, the other is a pickem.

RWFender1
12-14-2006, 02:30 PM
i would have to expect michigan being favored to win going into it but the spread has to be close

soybean
12-14-2006, 02:40 PM
I think snuff said in vegas it is -2, michigan favored.

RWFender1
12-14-2006, 02:44 PM
interesting

danman253
12-14-2006, 08:14 PM
Take it FWIW, but those who think Michigan will come pout flat cuz its the NC are dead wrong

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=Au8Ush9HVFMbrRXWEDjCYyAcvrYF?slug=ap-rosebowl-michigan&prov=ap&type=lgns

soybean
12-15-2006, 12:02 AM
I think someone posted the article about long and henne wanting to comeback because they have "unfinished" business. I hope that means they arent looking past the rose bowl.

RWFender1
12-15-2006, 02:01 AM
"Each team believes it could have been playing for a championship and has plenty of motivation going into a Rose Bowl that could establish which is the top-ranked team next preseason."

It will be a good game by both teams, no doubt

soybean
12-16-2006, 11:57 AM
On sportsbook.net i think that's the site p-L uses, it has michigan and usc dead even. Oh man this game is gonna be good, i just hope it's close because it'll be a great stepping stone for next year, where we'll see you guys in the NC.

yodabear
12-16-2006, 06:24 PM
On sportsbook.net i think that's the site p-L uses, it has michigan and usc dead even. Oh man this game is gonna be good, i just hope it's close because it'll be a great stepping stone for next year, where we'll see you guys in the NC.

fo shizzle, I said it myself on December 3rd that I believe this is a preview of the 2008 National Championship.

RWFender1
12-16-2006, 08:14 PM
sort of...a lot can happen in a year though too

elway777
12-16-2006, 09:19 PM
Kind of like the Ohio state vs. Notre Dame rematch from last year right? :wink: