Ohio State-Michigan thread

Bowl games are arranged matchups, this is a regular season contest that happened to turn out as 1 v. 2 and it's the first one this late in the regular season with two undefeated teams in 11 years (Florida-FSU) and latest between two undefeated teams from the same conference since 1987 (OU-NU).
As for your revisionist history with the importance of the programs with national titles, I dont think you can say they have more than Michigan or OSU. All four are in an upper tier with Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Alabama....

 

Every trip I made to Columbus to cover the game, I made sure my rental car had non-Michigan plates...

 

Well that's why I said arguably. I'd match USC's football tradition up against anyone's.

Last year's NC game may have been arranged, but it was still a game. Now if you say, regular-season game of the century, no problem.

As far as NCs go, the two most recognized polls are the AP and the Coaches. USC has five AP national championships, Ohio State four. Texas has two, and Michigan has one.

USC has six coaches NCs, Texas four, Ohio State three, Michigan none.

Like Casey said, you can look it up. I did.

So according to that data, USC does have more national championships than either of the other three schools mentioned.

(There are also polls that named USC the 1928, 1929, 1931, 1932 and 1933 national champions. But I didn't include them).

 

Actually, Michigan has two AP titles -- 96 and 47.
ANd following your logic, Minnesota has a better football tradition than Texas or Penn State.

AP National Championships

Team Total Seasons

Notre Dame 8 1943, 1946-1947, 1949, 1966, 1973, 1977, 1988
Oklahoma 7 1950, 1955-1956, 1974-1975, 1985, 2000
Alabama 6 1961, 1964-1965, 1978-1979, 1992
USC 5 1962, 1967, 1972, 2003-2004
Miami-FL 5 1983, 1987, 1989, 1991, 2001
Ohio State 4 1942, 1954, 1968, 2002
Nebraska 4 1970-1971, 1994-1995
Minnesota 4 1936, 1940-1941, 1960
Texas 3 1963, 1969, 2005
Florida State 2 1993, 1999
Tennessee 2 1951, 1998
Michigan 2 1948, 1997
Penn State 2 1982, 1986
Pittsburgh 2 1937, 1976
Army 2 1944-1945
Florida 1 1996
Colorado 1 1990
BYU 1 1984
Clemson 1 1981
Georgia 1 1980
Syracuse 1 1959
LSU 1 1958
Auburn 1 1957
Maryland 1 1953
Michigan State 1 1952
Texas A&M 1 1939
TCU 1 1938

---
This site is great.
Has every weekly AP poll from the beginning.
http://www.soonerstats.com/fb/polls/index.cfm

 

Since when does "exposed" translate to "lose to a (present or eventual) Top 10 team?" Does that mean either Ohio State or Michigan will be "exposed" on Saturday?

 

According to the parameters set by Saluki, yes.

 

With Musberger calling the game, I wonder if he'll go Ohio Stadium "The Big House" like he did last year before the Texas game.

Over/under on "You are looking live..." has been set at 5.5

 

I'm not sure what to think of that. Sometimes you invite more trouble by getting uptight about potential trouble, but large amounts of alcohol will be involved here and the game will be over after the sun sets.

A loss or win won't determine what happens afterwards. I think it all comes down to what happens during the game.

 

I'm not saying this game is overhyped or anything ... but with all the talk of teams overrated, hey, is Ohio State only No. 1 because that's where it was ranked in the preseason? Yes, the Buckeyes had an impressive win at Texas, but, as "they" say, "Who else have they played?" Basically they had No. 1, beat the one tough opponent on their schedule and then kept winning, so no one knocked them down.

I really don't care who wins this game, but the hype has been a little too unreal.

 

'Bama's '64 title is a fraud.

 

ESPN/ABC is showing this game, so overhype was built into the broadcast.

But this is, by all accounts, the biggest rivalry in college football (and at least top-5 in all of sports.) It's the biggest game on each team's schedule, every year, and it decides the Big Ten championship (and previously, a Rose Bowl berth) just about every year.

The fact that a) both teams are undefeated upon meeting for the first time since 1973; b) they're ranked 1-2 upon meeting for the first time ever; and c) the winner is absolutely guaranteed of playing in the BCS championship game (with the loser, at worst, almost assuredly getting a consolation bid to the Rose Bowl) ... means this is easily the biggest regular-season game in a decade(s).

Doesn't mean it'll be a classic, postgame. It could be. But the hype, pregame, is mostly deserved.

 

The Trib's Rick Morrissey weighs in on a potential rematch.

OSU-Michigan a BCS travesty in the making

In other words, the national championship game will take place Saturday in Columbus, Ohio, when the No. 1 Buckeyes play cordial hosts to the No. 2 Wolverines. Assuming there won't be a blowout, nothing will change my opinion about this being the title game except one scenario:

The two undefeated teams put on a game worthy of all the hype, and poll voters and unemotional computers keep Ohio State and Michigan in the top two positions. Then we could have a real national championship game between the two teams on Jan. 8 in Arizona.

That scenario is not likely to play out (somewhere there's a federal law that says losing teams always have to drop), but if there were a god of rankings, it would. It just seems silly that, after the teams have stood out all season, a close loss in a great game would push one of them out of the national championship picture.

And, meanwhile, Notre Dame, ranked fifth in the BCS standings, has an outside chance of playing in the title game.

If Notre Dame somehow inches itself into that spot ahead of Michigan, it will be a travesty. The Wolverines crushed the Irish 47-21 on Sept. 16 at Notre Dame Stadium.

What reasonable system would penalize Michigan for losing a close game to the No. 1 team in the nation and down the line reward the Irish with a BCS title shot? A stupid reasonable system.

The team with the best argument for moving ahead of Saturday's Big Ten loser is USC, ranked third in the BCS. With convincing victories over California this week and Notre Dame the next, it would have a chance to impress voters.

But are the Trojans as good as Ohio State or Michigan? No. And unlike the two teams playing in Columbus this weekend, the Trojans already have one defeat. Let's say Ohio State beats Michigan. Why would USC's loss to Oregon State mean less than Michigan's one loss to the nation's top-ranked team? Again, it makes no sense.

Both coaches involved are taking the head-down approach to what might come next, which should surprise absolutely no one.

"That hasn't entered any of our thinking," Ohio State's Jim Tressel said. "If you had the chance to sit and watch Michigan on film as many hours as we have, that's all you'd be thinking about."

"We do have a system (the BCS), and that system will take care of that question," Michigan's Lloyd Carr said.

I like the system. I love the controversy. I love the debate. A playoff would solve everything, but it would leave a hole where all the arguments used to be. That would be a shame.

A tight, well-played game Saturday would expose the weakness in the BCS setup: Just because someone will lose the game shouldn't mean a fall from college-football grace.

How can you have a Game of the Century—OK, a century in its early years—or the biggest game in Columbus in decades and then have it devalued by the polls?

Because that's the way the system works?

Not a satisfactory answer.

The Big Ten is done with its season after this weekend and will have to wait to see what the other conferences do.

The guess here is that with most other teams having at least two more games after this weekend, the loser of the Ohio State-Michigan game is going to be ignored for a while.

The prediction here is that Michigan will be that ignored team.

The rankings and the chance for a rematch aren't the point, Tressel insists.

"It's the Ohio State-Michigan game," he said. "It's the real reason guys come to Ohio State and go to Michigan—to have two of the great schools, two of the great historic programs get together at the end of the season.

"That's really larger than all those other things. Those other things are real, but the fact that it's Ohio State vs. Michigan and we have so much respect for who they are and how they do things … that really is the primary focus to our kids."

Carr had similar comments.

"We are looking forward to the renewal of the greatest rivalry in college football," he said.

Hope he and Tressel have an opportunity for a re-renewal in January.

rmorrissey@tribune.com