OSU vs. Michigan 2? No Way!

Now that USC has lost a game and there are only two quality undefeated teams left in the country in Michigan and Ohio State, we've started to hear a lot of talk about how, after one of them inevitably loses to the other when they play later this season, they should get a rematch in a bowl game for the national title.

And I call foul. Once those two teams have played once, that should be it. You've proved which team is better via head-to-head play. Assuming that there is another undefeated team in the country at that point, that team should get the shot. Combine that with the fact that OSU has played ONE quality team all year (and no offense to my wife, who's a Longhorns fan, but Texas was over-rated coming into this season, thus diminishing OSU's accomplishment at being undefeated thus far) and you need to give other teams a chance.

Add to this that the rule of thumb in the past is that teams who lose late in the season traditionally get less of a shot than teams who lose early in the season at the top bowl games and high end-of-season rakings. Case in point: Notre Dame in 1993 (the year of the big Florida State win). ND was penalized by the voters heavily for losing their late game to Boston College in the final rankings, despite beating the team who was voted the national champion and having an identical record.

"But that was before the BCS," you counter. The point is the same: end-of-season rankings decide which teams go to which bowl games. And when OSU or Michigan lose that final game, they should drop far enough down that they don't get another shot at the top game. A team who lost earlier in the seaon - an Auburn, Notre Dame, Texas, etc. should get that shot instead of a team who lost late. If there is any sense of consistency in the unspoken rules of NCAA football rankings, then that's how it should work out (if there isn't another unbeaten BCS team at that point, and there should be one at the most.