Let's not repeat the mistake of 2006 . . . we need to lobby our case, HARD.

Submitted by M-Dog on

 

In 2006 after #2 Michigan lost to #1 Ohio State in a nail-biter, Lloyd gracefully stepped away and let the pundits and talking heads make of it what they will. 

Meanwhile, Urban Meyer *ahem* dubiously lobbied long and loudly for Florida to be included in the BCS championship game.  It worked, and Florida got to take advantage of an opportunity that could have been ours.

Let’s not make that same mistake a decade later. 

We have a voice now due to the internet and social media, and we have a coach that will stand up for us.

All that Zapruder analysis of a single game changing call by mere inches, and Harbaugh’s call-out of obvious referee bias . . . plus the self-evident results of a 2 OT game in Columbus OH are starting to sink in to the broader media:  Michigan and Ohio State are two absolutely evenly matched teams.

CFP #2A and #2B.

If the CFP committee thinks that Ohio State is one of the 4 best teams, then they have to think that Michigan is one of the 4 best teams.  If Ohio State goes, we go.  Both of us go or neither of us goes.

This truth is starting to take hold in the media at large after they have had some time to absorb the full results of The Game.   And you know that the CFP committee is paying attention.  When even guys like Pat Forde start to make the case for Michigan in the CFP, you know you have a compelling case.

It’s time to make that case.

This is an internet call to arms.  Get on your soapbox and preach long and loudly:  If Ohio State is one of the top 4 teams, then it is self-evident that Michigan is one of the top 4 teams. 

CFP #2A and #2B.

If Ohio State goes, Michigan goes.  Both of us go, or neither of us goes.  

You know all that energy we as a fanbase always use to win all those “best uniforms” and “best fight song” contests?  Now it’s time to use that energy for something that actually matters.

We have a compelling story to tell, and it’s time to tell it.  Tell it to anyone and everyone, by all media available. Unlike 2006, we and our coach have a voice now, and people are listening.

It may ultimately work out, it may not.  But a decade later, we won’t repeat the same mistake of the past by sitting quietly on our hands while other programs out-hustle us.

 

MGoBoard
Football

Blue2000

November 28th, 2016 at 10:27 AM ^

If Wisconsin wins this week, they'll be conference champion solely because they had the luxury of playing in the easier of the two conference divisions.  Beyond that, there is no credible argument that they have a better resume than us, to say nothing of the fact that they lost to us head to head.  Being wedded to the idea of conference champions having to go is silly.  

Joined: 01/06/2009

MGoPoints: 7901

M-Dog

November 28th, 2016 at 11:32 AM ^

Yes, the same logic that puts Ohio State in should put us in.

If you want to make the case that non-division winners should not get in over conference champions, then fine.  That's a legit case.

But if you have already decided that non-division winners should get in over conference champions (Ohio State), then you've made it clear where your head is at.  By that same criteria, Michigan should be in.  Michigan = Ohio State.

 

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 257507

yossarians tree

November 28th, 2016 at 3:32 PM ^

No, as I pointed out in another thread, these split division conferences, with their unbalanced non-division schedules, often lead to teams that are clearly not among the top two in the conference going to the title game and so becoming "conference champions."

Anybody who does not think OSU and Michigan are the two best teams in the B1G is on meth.

Then again, it is Penn State.

Joined: 08/19/2010

MGoPoints: 22292

FauxMo

November 28th, 2016 at 10:00 AM ^

UM and OSU are the two best teams in the B1G, championship game or not. If Colorado beats Washington (please, please, please), I truly believe it should be: Alabama, OSU, Clemson, Michigan in that order. But honestly, if Washington beats Colorado, I think they should take our spot at #4. That is me being as non-biased as I can be... 

Dream scenario: Both Washington and Clemson lose this weekend, and PSU beats Wisky. Then I think UM has a real shot at #4... 

Joined: 06/17/2010

MGoPoints: 137563

UMAmaizinBlue

November 28th, 2016 at 10:06 AM ^

If Clemson loses, wouldn;t we have the opportunity to play them in the Orange Bowl? That'd be a tough draw to avoid by putting UM in the CFP. I know that the goal is to put in the best 4, but TV revenue and viewer numbers matter more than (integrity, the truth, values, competition, honesty and) what's right.

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 36258

UMAmaizinBlue

November 28th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^

That we should make it if Clemson and UW lose. My point is that the CFP is assumed to be non-biased especially when copnsidering things like bowl match-ups, but after Saturday I'm in full conspiracy theory mode. 


However, one of those theories is that the B10 did all they could to ensure OSU won so that they could get 2 B10 teams into the CFP as easy as possible, so whatever. I'd dead inside. Nothing makes sense. I'm still about a week away. I'm trying. 

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 36258

ijohnb

November 28th, 2016 at 10:26 AM ^

thing that I have taken note of -  the Mad Hatter has essentially disappeared from these pages in the last two weeks.  I don't know exactly what kind of shenanigans were at play in Columbus on Saturday, I am just saying that I have some questions for him about his whereabouts and activties over the last week if and when he does return.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

M-Dog

November 28th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^

We lost by 1 point on the road at night.

Clemson lost to Pitt at home.  Yet they are still ranked top 4.  Shit happens during a 12 game season.

We proved we are at the exact same level as CFP #2 Ohio State on Saturday.  If you think they are top 4, then we are top 4.

If #3 loses to #2 on the road in 2OT by way of a controversial call, then that says that you got it exactly right . . . those teams are indeed #2 and #3.

 

 

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 257507

RobSk

November 28th, 2016 at 3:23 PM ^

100% right. Look, I love Michigan. I love how we played this year. It's a team that will have a place in my heart forever. That said - I don't think it's the right thing for a 2 loss Michigan team to be in the playoff over a 1 loss Power 5 team that won their conference. Here's part of the reason:

Let's say Michigan plays Alabama. They beat them. So Alabama is 12-1 and we're 11-2.

Do we deserve the NC?

If I were an Alabama fan, that would piss me off. We lost to Iowa. They didn't lose their close games. There should be a clear consequence to that.

If we beat Iowa, I'm 100% behind rooting for Michigan to be in. If we beat OSU, even more so.

This year, for all these great players, for all the crazy reasons,  it just didn't happen that way. As much as it is a bummer, I don't think it's the right thing for us to be in the playoff.

     Rob

Joined: 03/01/2010

MGoPoints: 2999

LS And Play

November 28th, 2016 at 10:03 AM ^

The good news: A lot of the lobbying is being done for us. I saw Herbie and Golic on ESPN, and they agreed that if Colorado beats Washington, Michigan should be in at #4. 

Joined: 08/25/2012

MGoPoints: 8457

mgoblue0970

November 28th, 2016 at 10:03 AM ^

The only problem with this scenario (both UM and that school down south) is that it invalidates the conference champ.  I don't want to see college football go down the road of stating the conference champ is the 3rd best team.  It truly makes conference games meaningless then.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 18648

mgoblueben

November 28th, 2016 at 10:07 AM ^

ok do you honestly believe Penn state or wisconsin is the best or second best team in the league? You will never convince me of that. Neutral field with neutral refs and we kick osu's ass 9 of 10 times. But there's also 0% chance we get in the CFP. They won't take 3 B1G teams and they won't take osu and us without the winner. Season over in my mind.

Joined: 06/23/2011

MGoPoints: 2475