Writers want a rematch, Coaches do not.

Johnny Majors? What about Jim Brown?

 

That's fine, but they shouldn't feel like they have to expand just to get to a conference title game. Right now, the system skews in favor of the conferences with enough teams to have a title game. It's not going to be an issue this year (the top three contenders to play Ohio State do not have conference title games), but I know that in NCAA 2007, I as Oregon have been bypassed by teams that got a last-week boost by playing in the SEC or Big XII title game. And if it holds up on a video game, surely it holds up in real life.

 

Exactly whose rankings are those you are quoting? And by what criteria?

Let's face it. All the conference really cares about is the profile of football and men's basketball. Pitt's men's basketball program would move right in as one of the best in the Big 10. In addition to their recent run of success, they have a good young coach and their new on-campus arena should be a help in the long run.

The football program is pretty lousy right now, but I don't know that it's any worse than the current Big 10 bottom feeders. And it's not like there is no potential at all. Sharing a home field and practice facility, both of which are relatively new, with the Steelers helps. So does being in a state with strong high school football.

Then right coach can win there. Some decade they may actually get it right and hire that right coach.

 

well ofcourse people don't want rematches, but, what other team has a chance against OSU? exactly, none, thats why i believe that it would be better if Michigan faces OSU again

 

Well, if that's how you think. Why don't we just do a highlights show and hand OSU the trophy?

 

i'm not sure about that. if michigan faces them again, i think it'll be an even closer and more exciting game

 

Are you Steve Nash or Steven Ash?

 

Or perhaps St. Even Ash?

 

Never said they should feel a need to expand for a conference game. Conferences know what works best for them, how to best conduct business.

And are you sure this system favors conferences with enough teams for title games? We have had 2006 Ohio State, 2005 USC, 2004 USC and 2002 Ohio State make the title game the past five years. 2003 USC barely missed when LSU won the SEC title game and moved up at the end, so I see your point there. But that's more than respectable for two conferences.

 

Is Division 1-A football the only sport in which the NCAA doesn't officially recognize a champion?

 

It's about the profile of the conference, and those are the two sports that matter most. Though I agree, Pitt's other sports are definitely a detriment in this respect.

 

I just detest absolute statements like that.

Nobody had a chance against Nebraska in 1983.

Nobody had a chance against Miami in 1986.

Nobody had a chance against Miami in 1992.

Nobody had a chance against FSU in 2000.

Nobody had a chance against Miami in 2002.

"Nobody" was 5-0 in those bowl games.

Ohio State might be the best team. They might not be. But with the rarest of exceptions (Nebraska 1995 comes to mind), every team is beatable.