Would we got our rematch in 2006? If...

Submitted by Super J on September 23rd, 2009 at 2:31 PM

As others have pointed out on this site that RR is more accessible to the media then LC. So I put this out to everyone.

Would RR stand by quietly while Urban was whining to every media outlet that a rematch in 2006 would be a bad idea? As we all know it was Urban's campaign that help cause the pollsters to vote Fla a few points ahead of us.

Personally, I think RR would have publicly debated Urban. I don't know if it would have led to a NC rematch for the Big Ten but it would have been more fun then not hearing from LC at all.

Thoughts?

Comments

Scott Dreisbach

September 23rd, 2009 at 2:42 PM ^

RR is a pretty outspoken guy and honest guy. He did tell some Michigan fans to "get a life" last year. Last year, when Michigan was ranked in one poll preseason poll, RR said he didn't get the ranking and wasn't really justified. He also has joked about his legal troubles when he talked about Jon Conover getting a scholarship and Conover eventually going to law school by stating "someday he may be my lawyer". I have got to believe RR would've spoke in favor of a rematch. He probably would've added some small town West Virginia saying in there that the media would've caught onto similar to the Urban Meyer "how do you look those kids in the eye who just won the championship in the best football conference" speech. I am still angry about it almost 3 years later.

Bryan

September 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 PM ^

Let's hope we are not in the same situation ever again and that RR does not need to make a public case. Let the actions on the field speak, not the politics.

tdeshetler

September 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 PM ^

No chance we get another shot. I remember the media playing down the idea from the get go. Even if RR campaigned everyday, the fact that the game was 2-3 weeks before the conference championships hurt our chances as the excitement from the game cooled. Has the game been played the same week as the SEC and BIG 12 championships, that may have made a difference.

st barth

September 23rd, 2009 at 3:09 PM ^

rich rodriguez would have beaten ohio state. the pr campaign would have been irrrelevant.

it's a "mythical" national championship anyways. other than notre dame & the sec schools nobody really cares about it. i'd prefer a big ten championship, rose bowl victory & undefeated season any day over the mythical voters poll champion.

MichIOE01

September 23rd, 2009 at 3:13 PM ^

Love the first part of your answer.

Not so sure about the second. I think a lot more than ND & SEC schools care about the NC. Including people on this site. Plus, if we get a Big Ten championship, Rose Bowl victory, & undefeated season, we probably will get the MNC. (Though if we go undefeated we probably won't play in the Rose Bowl, we'll play in the BCS title game)

ThWard

September 23rd, 2009 at 3:12 PM ^

First, post-loss by USC. Then, post-USC's loss, by Florida. Sure, Meyer whined a bit... but to me, that speaks more of the pollsters desire to avoid a rematch without hammering Michigan too hard for a close loss in a big game.

quakk

September 23rd, 2009 at 3:16 PM ^

say what you will, but i was fine with lloyd standing idly by watching the politics take over.

i could see arguments both ways, and it was disappointing that we didn't get the rematch. at least to me, it would feel cheapened if we won something by politicking.

in fact, i'm not a mack brown or urban meyer or tom osbourne fan for exactly that reason.

MGoFreej

September 23rd, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^

is if the initial game happened early in the year. So no, RR's media savvy wouldn't have made a difference. Voters would only consider a rematch if they felt the loser had improved since the first meeting.

maizenbluenc

September 23rd, 2009 at 5:08 PM ^

I too believe once Urban started the politics, Lloyd should have spoken up for his players.

Rich Rod or Lloyd -- it wouldn't have made a difference, but at least we would have felt defended. Now if we had played Hawaii two weeks after OSU, and thrashed them ... then maybe.

I still think conference champions should play head to head in traditional bowls on new years day, and the two best looking teams on January second should play for the NC.

Wonder if Lloyd would have planned so conservative a game against USC, if he knew he had to really go to town and beat them to make the NC game?

Tater

September 23rd, 2009 at 3:31 PM ^

...but when Florida treated OSU like they were Navy, they proved that they were the correct choice for the championship game. If Florida had lost, it would be a different story.

At any rate, I hope that by next year or 2011, RR and UM can run the table, including the NC game. That would certainly remove all doubt or controversy.

saveferris

September 23rd, 2009 at 4:06 PM ^

"As we all know it was Urban's campaign that help cause the pollsters to vote Fla a few points ahead of us."

Actually, it was USC getting upset by UCLA that lead to all the Meyer drama that ultimately resulted in Florida to vaulting up to the 2nd spot in the polls. After Armageddon in Columbus, Michigan fell to #3 in the polls and trailed USC by a hair, which prompted the speculation that a rematch could happen. Florida was a relatively distant 4th. Then USC lost to UCLA next weekend, Florida won the SEC Championship, Meyer did his Hamlet performance and suddenly Michigan fell to 4th in the polls, waaaay behind USC at three. I've never seen a clearer example of poll tampering and it was all because pollsters weren't prepared for what to do when USC got upset and nobody wanted to see a U of M / OSU rematch.

I would've loved to see what that Michigan team could do to Ohio State on a neutral site, but our respective bowl performances proved neither of us really deserved to feel any kind of injustice was done.

jmblue

September 23rd, 2009 at 4:18 PM ^

our respective bowl performances proved neither of us really deserved to feel any kind of injustice was done.

I'm not a fan of this kind of reasoning. Just because Florida made the most of its opportunity, and we didn't in the Rose Bowl, does not necessarily mean that Florida actually deserved that championship appearance. They are two separate issues.

BaggyPantsDevil

September 23rd, 2009 at 4:15 PM ^

If people knew then what they know now it would have been Florida v. USC in the (Mythical) National Championship Game and Michigan v. Ohio State in a rematch in the Rose Bowl.

Think about how cool would that be? (sarcasm)

st barth

September 23rd, 2009 at 5:08 PM ^

a playoff is really only one step to having a true national championship.

with something like 120 FBS (div 1) teams combined with football's limited 12 week season, if you really wanted to be fair then those 120 teams would need to be broken into about 4 different classes of about 30 teams apiece which would then yield either a 4 or 8 team playoff and then you'd have something like a playoff that is inclusive & fair to all. but then you'd have a new problem of the second rate teams (say the spartans & badgers) complaining that they are second division while others (wolverines & buckeyes) are first division.

what might make for a nice wrinkle to the format would be if inclusion in the top division was based on performance. say on an annual basis, the top four teams of the second division could move up to the first division whose bottom four teams would drop. this could trickle through all four divisions. although i'm not very familiar with it, i believe that some of the european soccer leagues work like that.

finally, you'd have a true national champion. all of the existing conferences (big 10, sec, etc), all of those silly exhibition games (the bowl games) and much of the inter-regional trash talk would be rendered obsolete. think of it as kind of local spin-off of the globalization trends of the 21st century.

BlueFab5

September 23rd, 2009 at 4:54 PM ^

The national championship game is supposed to be between the #1 and #2 ranked teams in the country.

I can't understand how your only loss can be to the #1 team in the country, by 3 pts. on the road and you are not ranked #2 at the end of the season.

Maybe I missed something but the pollsters are supposed to rank teams based on their opinion of who the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc..team is.

Not who they want to play in the national championship game.

With that said I agree with an earlier post. RR doesn't lose that game.

The King of Belch

September 23rd, 2009 at 7:03 PM ^

Three years later?

The fact that people can "campaign" and get their team into a championship game, the fact that Notre Dame has an automatic qualifier, and the fact that not all the schools that play Super Duper Wowie Zowie Big Johnson Division Football because of a monopolized deal that only lets certain schools and conferences onto the Big Table of Adults on Turkey Day really makes the whole BCS thing a pile of shit.

No doubt the NC is mythical and all that, but more to the point there is no doubt that it is complete bullshit that quite often leaves a sour taste after its almost anticlimatic ending to the season.

I like the old system, wish it were back to replace this crap until some sort of playoff system can be implemented (in about 2500 years).