HailToMichigan;1046897; said:
The way I see it, when this bowl game is committed to history, few will remember Florida's record, whether or not they had Reggie Nelson, where they finished in the SEC standings, or anything of the sort. They will see that Michigan beat Florida, which is always, always a quality win. Nobody will remember or care that when we lost to Ohio State, our two best players were hurt. Appalachian State will never care that this year's Michigan team doesn't quite measure up to the Michigan teams of years past that built the Michigan reputation - they now have a crown jewel to point to for all time. So I prefer that the same standard be applied to our wins, which is why I don't like it when SEC fans of teams other than Florida would denigrate the win by denigrating Florida. Certain teams, you're always proud to beat no matter who they are. Florida's one. I would argue that if maybe Mississippi State had had the season Florida had and ended up in Orlando instead, it wouldn't mean as much, because of what Florida has accomplished in the past (especially the recent past) and what Mississippi State has not.
I agree with you that a team's history has a big effect on the way most people perceive games. And to the extent that today's games become a part of tomorrow's history; these things matter. For any other purpose they don't. Let me give you an example of each to show what I mean.
When Indiana beat OSU in the 'Shoe, it was very evident that the Buckeyes were just plain awful that year (bad enough to get the coach fired). But Indiana students were falling all over each other and crying tears of joy. They didn't care that OSU sucked that year. In order to validate their win, they might have wanted to believe that we didn't suck, but we did. But a long streak was broken that day whether we sucked or not. It's history, it matters.
Just 2 years earlier (give or take a year), BYU attempted to validate their fraudulent National Championship by playing Michigan in their bowl game. The coaches, players and university officials all made the argument that they had beaten mighty Michigan in their bowl game. What was interesting was that they all offered this argument in spite of the fact that few in the media were questioning their championship credentials, at least not in the interviews. These were all
preemptive arguments, because the BYU coaches, players, officials, parents, fans, water-boys, cheerleaders and their dogs all knew that Michigan was 6-and-6 that year and was an absolute also-ran in the Big-Ten.
A team's history means something to a game if the game has historical significance. But a team's history cannot, by itself, give historical significance to a game. The end of a winning streak, the first win of one kind or another... these are things that give a game historical significance and make a team's place in history matter. But an opponent's place in history cannot validate a national championship, or even a bowl win. Only their actual quality should be able to do that.
BYU 1985 will remain the most fraudulent champion in the history of sports; with the possible exception of USSR Basketball, 1972.
