This writer asks what many have probably rumbled around in their thoughts..... could Oregon have fared better? http://cfn.scout.com/2/1255725.html In the 4 team playoff Oregon gets that opportunity probably because I have to face the fact that UF gets knocked out in the first round by Bama. I dunno.... would ND have beaten the Ducks? Oregon surely could have scored more vs. the Tide but defensively ND was supposed to be better and yet couldn't do much to stop the Tide. Just because of tempo differences I think Oregon makes it closer but still Bama would get their 45 and the Ducks maybe 24 if that.
Certainly after a game like Monday night it's natural to wonder if some other team would have had a better game than ND did against Alabama. Maybe Oregon would have we'll never really know, it's not a sure thing. They did lose at home to Stanford in a big game, but that's just one game. Once you get into comparative scores trying to figure things out you come up with stupid things like Temple is better than somebody in the top 10. I think everybody is looking forward to the 4 game playoff as a way to get the best match up for the championship. I hope we go to 8 teams eventually and really I'd just as soon scrap the whole bowl system and go to a 16 team playoff. The vast majority of bowl games now are lame and the attendance is awful and even TV viewership is likely to be bad...I mean who watched Air Force and Rice?
There were some great great bowl games once you sat down to watch them.... many with down to the wire finishes. The problem is they don't excite you too much beforehand and I don't see that changing.....especially when they force a big bowl match-up between an FSU and a NI. Louisville proved to Fla however that you still have to play the game..... :cry: In any event I find myself perhaps more agreeable to an 8 team playoff.....and really.....that should capture the very best team.
I agree with the 8 team being better than 4 team. The reason I'd like to scrap the whole system and go to 16 team is that it allows the conferences to get their champion in, it allows for enough at large that some slots can be given to what you would call "mid majors" like Louisville and Northern Illinois. Sure there were some good games. So.Carolina and Michigan was a great game, and there were some others. But they were meaningless and most likely all bowl teams who went to those lower ranked bowls lost money. It just makes no sense, we had a bunch of 6-6 teams who went to bowls, even a 6-7 team like Ga.Tech went to a bowl. Those teams don't need to go to bowls.
That 7-5 USC team didn't want to be there, there were reports of a fight in the lockeroom after the game as well.
Second guessing is one of the top five favorite sports in the U.S. Herbstreit, who I've come to believe is as much a whore as Musberger - Junior Brent, I call him - was saying Monday night that "some people" think that the real national championship game was the SEC championship game. As they say, opinions are like a--holes. Everybody has one. The objective fact is that under the current system, ND earned its way into the game by going undefeated vs. a tough schedule..........maybe not the toughest in the land, but we didn't duck anyone or play any FCS teams or directional schools. We got thumped by the team that has become the gold standard for college football. We now have a clear focus on what we must do to perform at the highest level consistently and earn our way into the 4-team playoff when it's here.
Before the season the prevailing opinion was that ND won 8 games it would be a miracle. Our schedule was the reason these same talking heads had us at 7-5; it was considered possible the most difficult schedule in the nation. We had five Top 25 teams on the schedule. We played everywhere including in another country. Now were not worthy? If Oregon wanted to be in thsi game they should have gone 12-0. End of story.
Oregon had the same issue as Florida did.... didn't win their division. Hey... a pasting by the national champ is better than a pasting by the Big East Champ... so it could be worse. :wink:
Speculation about how Oregon would have done is just that. But the Ducks clearly have a better offense at this point in time than the Irish. We struggled all year with our offense, we had problems in the red zone and kicked way too many field goals. We certainly didn't have the speed that Oregon has in it's skill positions. But in our only common opponent Stanford...we beat Stanford in a close OT game with our back up QB after they knocked out our starter and Oregon lost to Stanford also in a close game in OT. The team that beat Alabama in the regular season and whaled on OU in the Cotton Bowl might have been the best chance to beat Alabama. But we'll never know who could have done better Monday night, maybe several other teams or maybe none.
I just think the Ducks could have scored 21-27 points or so and that makes the game seem closer. I mentioned L'ville before....check out these odds next year for the NC: http://forum.gatorsports.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=25108 The Cards in the 9 spot one ahead of the Irish.... and Oregon at #2.
I don't think the Denver Broncos could have scored 21 on Bama in that game. Shoulda, woulds, coulda just doesn't count!
Georgia scored 28 and was threatening more at the end. I think the Ducks have better O than the Dawgs.....by a little.
Maybe Oregon could have scored 21+ on Alabama, but the Bama defense is a bigger, badder, faster version of the Stanford defense and the Ducks didn't handle Stanford...so maybe they would have done better than ND or maybe they wouldn't have. Sheer speculation.
So what? That means nothing. Do you really want to get into a what-if game using relative scores? You know where that leads, right?