http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5845736

 

Ohio St. prez disregards TCU, Boise St.

Associated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Even if TCU and Boise State run the table, they still don't deserve to be in the Bowl Championship Series title game, Ohio State president E. Gordon Gee said Wednesday.

 

In an interview with The Associated Press, the president at the university with the largest athletic program in the country said that TCU and Boise State do not face a difficult enough schedule to play in the national championship game.

 

"Well, I don't know enough about the Xs and Os of college football," said Gee, formerly the president at West Virginia, Colorado, Brown and Vanderbilt universities. "I do know, having been both a Southeastern Conference president and a Big Ten president, that it's like murderer's row every week for these schools. We do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor. We play very fine schools on any given day.

 

"So I think until a university runs through that gantlet that there's some reason to believe that they not be the best teams to [be] in the big ballgame."

 

Gee, long an admirer of the BCS and the current bowl system, said he was against a playoff in the Football Bowl Subdivision.

 

"If you put a gun to my head and said, 'What are you going to do about a playoff system [if] the BCS system as it now exists goes away?' I would vote immediately to go back to the bowl system," he said.

 

He said the current system is better for the student-athletes.

 

"It's not about this incessant drive to have a national championship because I think that's a slippery slope to professionalism," he said. "I'm a fan of the bowl system and I think that by and large it's worked very, very well."

 

He cited Ohio State's presence in the 2007 national title game as an example.

 

The Buckeyes won their first 10 games that season to rise to No. 1 before losing 26-21 at home to unranked Illinois. They fell all the way to No. 8 in the BCS standings.

 

A series of upsets over the final weeks of the regular season and in other team's conference championship games led to the Buckeyes climbing all the way back to the No. 1 spot in the final BCS standings. They were matched against an LSU team with two losses.

 

Ohio State led 10-0 early only to have LSU come back and score the next 31 points in a 38-24 victory at the Louisiana Superdome.

 

"You know, it's a mystery," Gee said. "We were No. 1, then No. 11, then No. 7 and we ended up playing for the national championship. I think I kind of like that mixed-up mystery."

 

While he was at Vanderbilt, Gee abolished the athletic department since it was underwritten by the university's general fund anyway. He said he has no problem with an Ohio State program that fields 36 intercollegiate varsity teams and has an annual budget exceeding $120 million.

 

"Here, athletics pays for itself and also pays for academic programs at the institution," he said. "The other thing, of course, that I take a look at and see how well we are doing in terms of that notion of balance, which is what I was all about at Vanderbilt, which I am all about here."

 

He said Ohio State's eighth-ranked football team, which plays rival Michigan on Saturday, is in the top 10 in the nation not only on the field but also in terms of academic progress.

 

"That's the kind of balance I want to have," he said.

 

 

Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press

 

 

 

He sounds pretty silly to me, especially when he flanks these quotes with "Well, I don't know enough about the Xs and Os of college football."

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

 

Agreed. But I think that should only apply to the BCS championship game. I have no problem with Boise State playing in any BCS game. They'll probably beat whoever they play. I do have a problem with a team playing 1-2 tough games a year and cruising to the title game. A 1 loss LSU team might be more deserving than Boise State or TCU just because they play a much tougher schedule.

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

I agree, though this sound better if Ohio State (and most of the top teams) didn't constantly play cake schedules because it helped with the BCS.

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

I agree, though this sound better if Ohio State (and most of the top teams) didn't constantly play cake schedules because it helped with the BCS.

 

?

 

Ohio State played UM this year. In the past few years they've had home and home series with Texas and USC. The difference with Ohio State is that they dont have to schedule a tough out of conference schedule because their conference is already loaded with tough games. However, they still have scheduled tough out of conference games.A lot of the big teams have actually scheduled tough opponents in the early season.

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

I agree, though this sound better if Ohio State (and most of the top teams) didn't constantly play cake schedules because it helped with the BCS.

 

UF would be a better example

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

I agree, though this sound better if Ohio State (and most of the top teams) didn't constantly play cake schedules because it helped with the BCS.

 

UF would be a better example

 

UF plays in one of if not the toughest conference and also play non-conference a team that has being one of the top 5 programs the past 30 years. There's nothing wrong with the UF schedule.

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

I agree, though this sound better if Ohio State (and most of the top teams) didn't constantly play cake schedules because it helped with the BCS.

 

UF would be a better example

 

UF plays in one of if not the toughest conference and also play non-conference a team that has being one of the top 5 programs the past 30 years. There's nothing wrong with the UF schedule.

 

So there's nothing wrong with them not playing an OOC game outside the state of Florida since 1991? I agree, the SEC has been very good, but it's sort of ridiculous how they get away with playing a crappy OOC schedule when other SEC teams have played tough OOC games and won some of those games.

Strengh of schedule definitely needs to be considered when picking the BCS teams. For example I'm more impressed with an 11-1 team with the 10th toughest schedule than with a 12-0 team with the 90th toughest schedule..

 

I agree, though this sound better if Ohio State (and most of the top teams) didn't constantly play cake schedules because it helped with the BCS.

 

UF would be a better example

 

UF plays in one of if not the toughest conference and also play non-conference a team that has being one of the top 5 programs the past 30 years. There's nothing wrong with the UF schedule.

 

So there's nothing wrong with them not playing an OOC game outside the state of Florida since 1991? I agree, the SEC has been very good, but it's sort of ridiculous how they get away with playing a crappy OOC schedule when other SEC teams have played tough OOC games and won some of those games.

 

Nothing wrong because when looking at the entirety of their schedule it's fine.

 

If every year UF played a team located in Texas that was the caliber of FSU instead of playing FSU I don't think their schedule would be any tougher than what it is playing FSU.

I never said the caliber of FSU. They could play a crappy team or two outside of Florida, but they still won't. That what interests me the most.

too bad the Ohio State SOS isn't worlds apart from BSU & TCU

 

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2010-11-25-bcs-strength-of-schedule-debate_N.htm

 

guess that is what happens when your OOC includeds Ohio, Eastern Michigan & Marshall

 

Then you hit the meat of the conference schedule with such powers as Illinois, Indiana, Purdue & MN

 

That leaves 5 marquee games - 3 potentially solid (Miami, MI & PSU - neither are having banner years though) and 2 difficult games (Iowa & WI) one of which they lost

 

They can't get benefit from having Michigan State in the conference as they never had to play each other

too bad the Ohio State SOS isn't worlds apart from BSU & TCU

 

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2010-11-25-bcs-strength-of-schedule-debate_N.htm

 

guess that is what happens when your OOC includeds Ohio, Eastern Michigan & Marshall

 

Then you hit the meat of the conference schedule with such powers as Illinois, Indiana, Purdue & MN

 

That leaves 5 marquee games - 3 potentially solid (Miami, MI & PSU - neither are having banner years though) and 2 difficult games (Iowa & WI) one of which they lost

 

They can't get benefit from having Michigan State in the conference as they never had to play each other

 

 

It doesnt matter. Ohio State plays a tough conference. They had a tough schedule this year and played Miami, which they didnt have to. The difference between the "big conference schools" and TCU and Boise State is that they DONT have to schedule a tough out of conference schedule because their conferences are filled with ranked teams. When your conference is not good (i.e. WAC) and you have championship asperations, you HAVE to schedule tough teams. Playing nobody (out of conference and in conference) just does not get it done.

 

Despite that, a lot big teams still schedule tough out of conference opponents. Boise State has started to schedule tougher teams. However, they could certainly schedule more teams like Fresno State has been doing. Recently, Fresno State has had games against Wisconsin, USC, Georgia, Oregon, Tenn, etc... many of those games were in the same year. So if TCU or Boise wants to get more credit they should schedule tougher teams than Baylor.

So strength of schedule doesn't matter when discussing strength of schedule?

 

Also, I'm not sure how tough the big 10 is when the top teams don't play each other it loses some of it's impact

 

for OSU they played

 

Marshall (112 in Sagarin rankings), Eastern Michigan (184), Ohio (87), Purdue (91), Minnesota (92), Indiana (98)

 

Michigan & Penn State are respectable at 46 & 49 in the sagarin rankings

 

Miami ranks in at 34 and is worse this year than expected - can't fault OSU for that, but it is what it is ..... oregon state having a rough year didn't help out TCU & BSU

 

That leaves WI & IA as the two top 25 teams they really had to play and they lost to one of them

 

I see little difference to beating up MN, Purdue or Indiana than LA Tech, Idaho or Wyoming

 

The OSU strength of schedule per sagarin is 64, BSU is 62 and TCU is 76

 

NV, Hawaii, Fresno State, Utah, Air Force & even SD State this year really aren't that much different than michigan, Penn State or any of the other middling teams - in fact I'd put NV ahead of them

 

If you use the AP or coaches poll the big 10 is 4-24 against ranked teams

 

MN lost at home to a FCS school this year .... Purdue couldn't handle Toledo, but we expect that to be a nice win for OSU because it's a Big 10 team?!

 

right...................

So strength of schedule doesn't matter when discussing strength of schedule?

 

Also, I'm not sure how tough the big 10 is when the top teams don't play each other it loses some of it's impact

 

for OSU they played

 

Marshall (112 in Sagarin rankings), Eastern Michigan (184), Ohio (87), Purdue (91), Minnesota (92), Indiana (98)

 

Michigan & Penn State are respectable at 46 & 49 in the sagarin rankings

 

Miami ranks in at 34 and is worse this year than expected - can't fault OSU for that, but it is what it is ..... oregon state having a rough year didn't help out TCU & BSU

 

That leaves WI & IA as the two top 25 teams they really had to play and they lost to one of them

 

I see little difference to beating up MN, Purdue or Indiana than LA Tech, Idaho or Wyoming

 

The OSU strength of schedule per sagarin is 64, BSU is 62 and TCU is 76

 

NV, Hawaii, Fresno State, Utah, Air Force & even SD State this year really aren't that much different than michigan, Penn State or any of the other middling teams - in fact I'd put NV ahead of them

 

If you use the AP or coaches poll the big 10 is 4-24 against ranked teams

 

MN lost at home to a FCS school this year .... Purdue couldn't handle Toledo, but we expect that to be a nice win for OSU because it's a Big 10 team?!

 

right...................

 

 

MN also beat Iowa. The big ten rotates opponents. Ohio State missed Michigan State this year, but that was scheduled ahead of time. Plus no one knew they would be that good this year. Next year it wont be an issue because they will have a championship game. Some years confereces are down, you cant do anything about that. Two years ago the Big 12 south had three teams that were 11-1. This year the big 12 north could have sent a 3 loss nebraska team.

 

The bottom line is that teams in BCS conferences do not have to schedule tough out of conference games. Michigan, Penn State, Purde, etc... were all down this year. Many years they are very good. You cant say that about Air Force, Utah State, Wyoming, etc... Despite that, teams like Ohio State schedule tough games. In the past few years they've played series against Texas, USC and now Miami.

 

Boise State has done a better job the past two years. But since they play in a weaker conference they have to schedule tough teams if they want a legit shot at a title game. There was a report that Nebraska offered them a game, but they said they wanted a million dollars to travel to Lincoln.

MN is a horrible football team this year .... the fact IA lost to them does more to diminish IA than boost up MN (and I actually like the gophers....)

 

You can say all you want about teams being up/down scheduling in advance, etc

 

Bottom line is that the road OSU walked this year really wasn't that tough and definitely didn't feature tough games week in and week out ..... usually not the case in most conferences which have no shortage of light weights at the bottom

 

The teams can change around, but the dynamic stays pretty consistent (especially in the big 10) ...... you never have OSU, PSU, IA, WI, MSU & MI with elite teams in a given year .... a couple will rise, a couple will be in the high middle, a couple in the low middle and the rest is consistently poor

 

The message isn't a horrible one, but it kind of loses it's luster coming from OSU

 

7 SEC teams have SOS that rank in the top 30 .... the worst SOS in the SEC is 59th - which is still better than OSU

 

The Big 10 has 2 schools with SOS 30 or under (non top 25) and 6 schools with SOS greater than 50 .... as a conference the SEC has 16 wins against top 25 teams in the 2 major polls .... they also have 34 losses against top 25 teams ............. that's 50 times an SEC team has faced off against a top 25 team

 

The Big 10 with their 4 wins against top 25 teams is behind the 16 of the SEC, 6 of the Big 12 and ties them with the WAC

 

The lack of a championship game also does currently hurt them for a SOS angle as well - although that is changing, it doesn't affect this year

 

Also, how good michigan was a decade ago doesn't make them a harder opponent this year .... PSU being good last year doesn't earn you credit for beating them this year, etc

MN is a horrible football team this year .... the fact IA lost to them does more to diminish IA than boost up MN (and I actually like the gophers....)

 

You can say all you want about teams being up/down scheduling in advance, etc

 

Bottom line is that the road OSU walked this year really wasn't that tough and definitely didn't feature tough games week in and week out ..... usually not the case in most conferences which have no shortage of light weights at the bottom

 

The teams can change around, but the dynamic stays pretty consistent (especially in the big 10) ...... you never have OSU, PSU, IA, WI, MSU & MI with elite teams in a given year .... a couple will rise, a couple will be in the high middle, a couple in the low middle and the rest is consistently poor

 

The message isn't a horrible one, but it kind of loses it's luster coming from OSU

 

7 SEC teams have SOS that rank in the top 30 .... the worst SOS in the SEC is 59th - which is still better than OSU

 

The Big 10 has 2 schools with SOS 30 or under (non top 25) and 6 schools with SOS greater than 50 .... as a conference the SEC has 16 wins against top 25 teams in the 2 major polls .... they also have 34 losses against top 25 teams ............. that's 50 times an SEC team has faced off against a top 25 team

 

The Big 10 with their 4 wins against top 25 teams is behind the 16 of the SEC, 6 of the Big 12 and ties them with the WAC

 

The lack of a championship game also does currently hurt them for a SOS angle as well - although that is changing, it doesn't affect this year

 

Also, how good michigan was a decade ago doesn't make them a harder opponent this year .... PSU being good last year doesn't earn you credit for beating them this year, etc

 

True, but there is no way to forcast who is going to be good or who is going to be bad. The fact is that Michigan has been good (I think they have the most wins all time) and Penn State has been great in the past. Fresno State, Hawaii and the likes really havent been good year in and year out. OSU scheduled UM years ago when they were a top 5 team.

 

I think the Ohio State president's comments apply for to teams from non-BCS schools in general more than it applies to TCU and Boise State for just this year. In general, it is much tougher to win the Big 12, Big 10, ACC, SEC, etc... than it is to win the WAC or Sun Belt.

In general that's true - but then again, schools in those conferences don't have the endowments, budgets, TV deals, endorsements, etc

 

I try not to get hung up on the "identity" of a conference and try to look at the teams on their own merits ... while HI, Fresno, UT, etc may never be consistent top flight programs, each one of them has enough to flash every now and again when they get the right mix and put together a team that can play with anyone ..... in the years they don't have that team they are usually pretty solid

 

the main issue those conferences had wasn't the mid-level talent ..... people harped on how bad the bottom was, but I see little difference between beating a team that is in the lower tenth of all D1 schools by 60 and a team in the lower eigth of all D1 schools by 40 .... both are cakewalks

 

so that leaves the layer of good teams .... while those conferences may have 1 team that is at an elite level and then 1 that is just below that .... the big conferences can have 2 or 3 teams playing at an elite level each year

In general that's true - but then again, schools in those conferences don't have the endowments, budgets, TV deals, endorsements, etc

 

I try not to get hung up on the "identity" of a conference and try to look at the teams on their own merits ... while HI, Fresno, UT, etc may never be consistent top flight programs, each one of them has enough to flash every now and again when they get the right mix and put together a team that can play with anyone ..... in the years they don't have that team they are usually pretty solid

 

the main issue those conferences had wasn't the mid-level talent ..... people harped on how bad the bottom was, but I see little difference between beating a team that is in the lower tenth of all D1 schools by 60 and a team in the lower eigth of all D1 schools by 40 .... both are cakewalks

 

so that leaves the layer of good teams .... while those conferences may have 1 team that is at an elite level and then 1 that is just below that .... the big conferences can have 2 or 3 teams playing at an elite level each year

 

 

And that is the big difference. While the mid level and bottom tier programs (in any conference) have a good season every now and then, it is the fact that there is always 2-3 really good teams in most of the big conferences. The WAC really only has Boise State. People will give the big conferences the benefit of the doubt because the winner of the conference has beaten at least one top team.

 

Like I said earlier in this thread, on a given Saturday I think Boise State could beat anyone. And I think if they had gone undefeated both them and TCU are deserving of a BCS game, but I agree with the Ohio State president that they shouldn't be in the title game. The majority of their schedule was a cake walk. If we had a plus one, none of this would matter anyways...

I agree this year - they should be trumped by an unbeaten oregon & auburn team

 

I just find it curious that someone from OSU would bag on someone elses schedule .... his team isn't playing world beaters every week either and they picked up a loss

 

I'd put an undefeated OSU team above TCU or an undefeated Boise ..... but a 1 loss OSU team? Not a chance

I agree this year - they should be trumped by an unbeaten oregon & auburn team

 

I just find it curious that someone from OSU would bag on someone elses schedule .... his team isn't playing world beaters every week either and they picked up a loss

 

I'd put an undefeated OSU team above TCU or an undefeated Boise ..... but a 1 loss OSU team? Not a chance

 

 

I'd love it if somehow it ended up being OSU vs TCU in the rose bowl.