CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

If they all win this week Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Michigan State will finished tied atop the Big Ten. In this scenario, the Rose Bowl berth goes to the highest ranked team in the BCS rankings.

I, for one, think the first tiebreaker should be head to head competition. The B-10 says it is but only for a tie between two teams. If it truly was the real first tiebreaker wouldn't MSU be smelling the roses with a win this week?

Michigan State 1-0 against Badgers and Buckeyes
Wisconsin 1-1 against Buckeyes and Spartans
Ohio State 0-1 against Spartans and Badgers
OSU and MSU did not play each other this season.

Worse yet, even if they don't get to Pasadena and the conference gets a second BCS bowl game participant it still won't likely be MSU filling that spot either. Anybody else find that odd?

Huh? How can you have a three way head to head unless all of the teams play each other?

Head to head means exactly that...that teams have played on the field.

Point taken, but then again how can you take the other two ahead of an MSU when they are the only one that didn't lose to one of the schools they are tied with and one of the other schools didn't defeat either of the schools they are tied with?

Jason G wrote:Point taken, but then again how can you take the other two ahead of an MSU when they are the only one that didn't lose to one of the schools they are tied with and one of the other schools didn't defeat either of the schools they are tied with?

If Ohio State loses then head to head does apply. MSU goes. If Ohio State wins and Wisconsin loses, then Ohio State goes. Wisconsin is in the drivers seat in the Big 10. Basically MSU fell victim to their past. No one believed in them until later in the season and then they lost and that nailed them.

Actually if they all win, the biased BCS voters are in the driver's seat as much as anyone. Its just a matter of which road they prefer to take. I believe the same could be said if only Wisconsin loses, but at least in that case MSU has a shot at a BCS slot somewhere else, even though we all know they will prefer the LSUs and Stanfords of the world.

Nailed by their past? That is exactly what is wrong with CFB. The past should have nothing to do with the 2010 teams. In college football teams are drastically different from year to year because of players only having four years eligibility. There is always a huge turnover in personnel when comparing teams in different years.

Jason G wrote:Actually if they all win, the biased BCS voters are in the driver's seat as much as anyone. Its just a matter of which road they prefer to take. I believe the same could be said if only Wisconsin loses, but at least in that case MSU has a shot at a BCS slot somewhere else, even though we all know they will prefer the LSUs and Stanfords of the world.

Nailed by their past? That is exactly what is wrong with CFB. The past should have nothing to do with the 2010 teams. In college football teams are drastically different from year to year because of players only having four years eligibility. There is always a huge turnover in personnel when comparing teams in different years.

Maybe not, but the past is considered, especially recent past. If Wisconsin loses, then Ohio State goes. That is the only way Ohio State goes, because Wisky beat the pants off Ohio State on the field and you can't justify moving Ohio State in front of Wisconsin if Wisky wins.

I personally think Michigan State should go if they all win. Just because they beat Wisconsin who beat Ohio State.

I agree that the pre-season bias should not come into play here.

Preseason bias and a late loss. I like Sparty and their coach, but Wisky is a better team. The polls aren't wrong here.

Jason G wrote:Point taken, but then again how can you take the other two ahead of an MSU when they are the only one that didn't lose to one of the schools they are tied with and one of the other schools didn't defeat either of the schools they are tied with?

I don't think anyone is getting hosed, as the rules were in place, before the season. So in your scenario, you are saying that losing to Iowa or Minnesota is better than going Wisconsin going 1-1 vs MSU and OSU?

I really don't care how they do it, as long as the rules are in place before the season. Also, getting killed by Iowa does hurt their cause in the BCS rankings.

Spence wrote:Preseason bias and a late loss. I like Sparty and their coach, but Wisky is a better team. The polls aren't wrong here.

Agree, I think Wisconsin is the best team in the Big 10 this year.

It isn't close. Wisky is head and shoulders better than anyone in the big 10

I agree that Wisconsin is best team in the conference but they do have one conference loss as does MSU and the Spartans won head to head.

The bigger question here may not involve Wisconsin. If the Big Ten gets a second team into the BCS, should it be OSU or MSU? We all know who they will pick but do you agree with it?

We don't know for sure, but I think Ohio State is better than Sparty. I think that Penn State and MSU is going to be a tight game this weekend. Sparty is a little better than Penn State, but I think Penn State may win this game. Ohio State, if they win Saturday, will get a BCS bid over Sparty based on being higher ranked and being a better draw.

Michigan State has never been to a BCS game and they do have a pretty solid traveling fan base, I believe. If Michigan State did get picked up by the Orange or Fiesta, I'm sure fans would turn out in droves to see them play, but it would be risky to take them over Ohio State.