With Pitt and Georgia Tech losing this weekend, OSU's loss to Purdue didn't end up having any effect on standings or polls. Even had OSU won that game, it would still be #7 in the polls and alone in first atop the Big Ten.

At least I don't think OSU would have been ahead of Boise State in the polls, although I'm not positive. But anyway, who would have thought after that Purdue game that for all intents and purposes, the loss would not affect anything?

I don't really think the USC loss had an effect either. If Ohio State went 12-0, I don't think they'd be in line for the BCS National Championship game either.

Not that rankings matter that much at this stage (other than the BCS championship, of course), but I'd wager the loser of FLA-Bama will still be ranked ahead of OSU, and if all 3 teams wins their respective bowl games the SEC c'ship loser will still be ranked ahead of OSU, yet if OSU didn't lose to Purdue I can see the SEC c'ship loser being behind them.

But again, not that big of a deal....aside from the championship rankings mean little.

That's true, although they would have been #3 in the polls right now and we'd be praying for a Texas loss to Nebraska.

Leonardo wrote: I don't really think the USC loss had an effect either. If Ohio State went 12-0, I don't think they'd be in line for the BCS National Championship game either.

That would be very interesting to see what happened if that transpired, not that Texas is to blame for the Big 12 being relatively down this year...but I could see pollsters punishing Texas for their absolute crap out of conference schedule this year...Louisiana Monroe, UTEP, Wyoming and UCF is embarrassing. If you're a top program you need to schedule at least one top OOC opponent every year.

JoeA1010 wrote: That's true, although they would have been #3 in the polls right now and we'd be praying for a Texas loss to Nebraska.

This.

The only thing that would be different right now is that OSU would be rooting for Nebraska to beat Texas and get a chance to play for a title. Otherwise, the ending result wouldn't really be any different than it's going to be right now.

You're probably right if we would have gone 12-0 we'd still be on the outside looking in based on USC being a 3 loss team and Purdue being, well, crap for most of the early part of the year

I beg to differ. Had they went 12-0, they may have been able to jump Texas. At least according to the Sagarin rankings, they have played a slightly harder schedule, and their Elo_Chess would be slightly higher had they won both games.

They would have moved higher in the rankings having played the #9 team in USC at the time, and were already ahead of Cincy.

Not to mention, even AFTER the USC loss, we were still ranked ahead of Cincy in both the USA Today and AP Polls.

I think they'd be #4 behind Texas if they hadn't lost to Purdue, based on the SOS, however, I could be wrong as they could have went down considering USC started losing.

But had they been undefeated, I think they'd be #3 or #4 with a decent chance to play for the NC game. Remember although they've lost the last 2 NC's, these bowl games are also looking for well-traveled fans, along with winning programs, and Ohio State and Texas are about the same in those categories.

Somehow I don't see the voters putting us with 1 loss because of our style of play head of undefeated Boise, TCU, or Cincy.

darbypitcher22 wrote: Somehow I don't see the voters putting us with 1 loss because of our style of play head of undefeated Boise, TCU, or Cincy.

But remember, with the bowls, it's all about picking favorites and money.

You can't tell me with our fans alone, we wouldn't be chosen for a better bowl than at least 2 out of 3 of those teams. I mean isn't that one reason why everybody hates the BCS? Because they put 1 loss teams in front of the undefeated mid-majors?

If it was based on fans alone, hell yeah a ton of people would take us.

darbypitcher22 wrote: If it was based on fans alone, hell yeah a ton of people would take us.

The only way I don't see them picking us over those teams is our last two NC games, but even then, those two losses don't trump losing money to watch a mid-major play in a bowl game and get a heartwarming story.

yeah you're right about that, especially not in this economy

After the last two losses OSU had in the title game, they would set precedent and select either of those two mid majors over the Bucks and you can take that to the bank.

ytownfootball wrote: After the last two losses OSU had in the title game, they would set precedent and select either of those two mid majors over the Bucks and you can take that to the bank.

Those NC games still made them a TON of money. Point is, money trumps everything in a business like the BCS. Ohio State brings money.

ytownfootball wrote: After the last two losses OSU had in the title game, they would set precedent and select either of those two mid majors over the Bucks and you can take that to the bank.

TCU maybe - Boise, I doubt it, I'm withholding judgment but Boise hasn't looked that great save the Oregon win.

TCU will probably bring money this year to wherever they end up

Sure OSU brings bank, no matter where they go. But given the scenario I'm willing to bet that the committee would be less likely to take the heat this time around given two viable undefeateds. I'm a huge OSU homer but I just don't think they'd get the nod.

ytownfootball wrote: Sure OSU brings bank, no matter where they go. But given the scenario I'm willing to bet that the committee would be less likely to take the heat this time around given two viable undefeateds. I'm a huge OSU homer but I just don't think they'd get the nod.

They haven't cared about heat in the past, why would they start now? Just to make a point? I don't see it.

But the point is moot, as it's not a possibility. We get another Rose Bowl bid.

GO BUCKS!

And Rose Bowls are something special, to be remembered at Ohio State... sure BCS games and National Championship games are special, but there's just something about saying you played on a Rose Bowl team at Ohio State...

Not to make a point...but to keep the falacy that their system "works". What better way than to put a mid major in over a BCS U...OSU would be their SAFEST possibility of getting away with as little reprecutions as possible.

ytownfootball wrote: After the last two losses OSU had in the title game, they would set precedent and select either of those two mid majors over the Bucks and you can take that to the bank.

This would definitely explain why a 2-loss OSU was given an at-large bid to the Fiesta Bowl last year (you know,after the two title game losses) over undefeated Boise State.

$$ wins every time.

dtdtim wrote:

ytownfootball wrote: After the last two losses OSU had in the title game, they would set precedent and select either of those two mid majors over the Bucks and you can take that to the bank.

This would definitely explain why a 2-loss OSU was given an at-large bid to the Fiesta Bowl last year (you know,after the two title game losses) over undefeated Boise State.

$$ wins every time.

That was then and it was not only not surprising but expected. Now Boise, TCU have strung together a couple good seasonns and OSU hasn't shown well in the past couple (fans and $ have no doubt) but I don't think they'd pass on the opportunity to show their system works, and their justification would be simply that OSU hasn't gotten it done recently and no one would be able to disagree with that.

If they were willing to take 2-loss OSU over an undefeated Boise last year (a year in which nothing impressive of note happened for the Bucks), they would do it this year. You're still not getting the fact that OSU 'getting it done' has little to nothing to do with them getting picked. OSU gets it done where it ultimately counts ($$) as good as or better than most any other program in the country. That's all that matters when a National Championship Trophy isn't involved.

You act like Boise is all of a sudden legitimate because of this season. Last year they were also undefeated and did it in more impressive fashion than this year and still managed to get passed over by a 2-loss OSU squad that was underwhelming at best even at the end of last year. This was also the OSU team that was pasted 35-3 in LA and, without a doubt, was hardly any better at the end of the season than they were when they took that beating. If Boise was going to be picked over a BCS School like OSU in any year, last year would have been it.

If OSU were 10-2 right now and NOT the Big 10's outright rep to the Rose Bowl they would be picked in a second over Boise for the Fiesta. There are certain schools you don't turn down when available, and Ohio State is one of those schools, undefeated Boise or not.

dtdtim wrote: If they were willing to take 2-loss OSU over an undefeated Boise last year (a year in which nothing impressive of note happened for the Bucks), they would do it this year.

You act like Boise is all of a sudden legitimate because of this season. Last year they were also undefeated and did it in more impressive fashion than this year and still managed to get passed over by a 2-loss OSU squad that was underwhelming at best even at the end of last year. This was also the OSU team that was pasted 35-3 in LA and, without a doubt, was hardly any better at the end of the season than they were when they took that beating.

If OSU were 10-2 right now and NOT the Big 10's outright rep to the Rose Bowl they would be picked in a second over Boise for the Fiesta. There are certain schools you don't turn down when available, and Ohio State is one of those schools, undefeated Boise or not.

You're missing my point entirely. Boise has mothing to do with what I'm saying, TCU either for that matter. My point is more in regards to the heat the BCS system is and will get for "not getting it right" in light of so many zero loss teams.

I just think for them to keep their gig rolling they would pick one of the others, that's all I'm saying.