• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Fiu at CFN: Why tOSU Might Not Be #1

BB73

Loves Buckeye History
Staff member
Bookie
'16 & '17 Upset Contest Winner
Oh8ch mentioned that he believed tOSU's chances of winning out are inversely proportional to the amount of smoke blown up the teams collective asses. Here's an article that does just the opposite.

Note that Fiu voted tOSU #1, he has written the article solely for the sake of argument. So please refrain from blasting him.

cfn

Why Ohio State Might Not Be No. 1
372035.jpg


By Pete Fiutak
CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Oct 31, 2006

Ohio State might be everyone's number one team, but Pete Fiutak gives ten reasons why it might not be, along with thoughts on the Florida State coaching situation, the unsung Heisman candidate, and the ultimate, last second Halloween costume in the latest Cavalcade of Whimsy.



If this column sucks, it?s not my fault ? I?m defying Georgia president Michael Adams and Florida president Bernie Machen by calling it the World Largest Outdoor Cocktail Column. Enjoy responsibly.

The C.O.W. airing of the grievances followed by the feats of strength
Anyone who?s ever had to take a collegiate-level argument and persuasion type of class has had to do this: come up with the argument that you?re 100%, sky-is-blue certain you can win, and then create the counter-argument that could beat you. Another part of the exercise is to take an unwinnable position (Hitler was really a sweetie, Pepsi is better than Coke, Tom and Katie?s marriage won?t be a sham), and win. The point is to strengthen your skills of persuasion by understanding the other side of your debate.

With that in mind, I?m now going to attempt to do the impossible, and without a net, and try to convince you that Ohio State might not be the number one team in the country. Note the word might. Before your head explodes, Buckeye fans, I voted Ohio State in the top spot and do believe this is the best team in America. With that said ?

10. 2005 USC, 2002 Miami and 2000 Florida State
In 2000, everyone handed the red-hot Florida State Seminoles the national title before playing Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl. The Sooners won 13-2. The 2002 Miami team was being hailed as an unstoppable juggernaut before losing to Ohio State in the classic 2003 Fiesta Bowl. ESPN ran a whole series on how the 2005 USC team was the greatest team ever before Vince the Longhorns had other ideas. Of course, you surely remember how the 2003 Oklahoma team couldn?t be beaten until Kansas State applied a 35-7 whupping in the Big 12 title game. If one thing is constant in college football, it?s that things almost never go according to form. Just ask Ohio State because ...

9.
We've seen this before
The 1998 team was better than the 2006 version, but it lost in a shocking upset to Michigan State. The 1996 team was a juggernaut that had the national title there for the taking before losing to Michigan at home. The 1995, 1979, 1975, 1973, 1970, and 1969 teams were all, arguably, better than this one, and they couldn?t close late in the year. Obviously this is a different team with a different coaching staff in a different era, but as good as it is, we?re not talking about a killer on the all-time scale. Could this team beat the 2005 version that lost two games? It?s debatable.


8. Run defense
NIU?s Garrett Wolfe ran for 171 yards against OSU in the opener. Texas, who for some reason abandoned the ground game in the 24-7 loss in September, rumbled for 172, and Penn State?s Tony Hunt ran for 135 yards. The Buckeyes would?ve beaten Michigan State no matter what, but it didn?t help Sparty that it was without Javon Ringer. The stats are misleading since most teams get down against TOSU (The Ohio State University) and have to start chucking it, but that doesn?t mean a good running game wouldn?t work against a solid, but not impenetrable, defensive front. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the Buckeyes had to deal with a team with a phenomenal running game like West Virginia, Clemson, Arkansas or ?

7.
Wisconsin
Part of the nastiness of playing in a big-time league is having to sidestep several landmines. Wisconsin might not be better than Ohio State, but it?s growing into one of the Big Ten's best teams as the season has gone on. Forget the sleepwalking performance against Illinois, the Badgers have the defense (ranked seventh in the nation and second against the pass), and the running game that could?ve given OSU a fight ? if they played. The Buckeyes miss Purdue and Wisconsin this year off the Big Ten schedule.

6. The offense has only faced two defenses with a pulse
Troy Smith was magnificent against Texas and struggled against Penn State. It?s one thing to beat a top defense once in a while, and it?s another to face good defenses week in and week out. No one outside of the Longhorns or Nittany Lions had the line or the pass rush to generate any sort of pressure on the future Heisman winner. Granted, Smith's mobility has allowed him to get out of dangerous situations, but ?

5. The Big Ten isn?t exactly the SEC this season
Florida has had to face the nation?s No. 1 (LSU), No. 14 (Georgia), No. 18 (Alabama), No. 24 (Auburn), and No. 31 (Tennessee) defenses, and still has to face the No. 37 (South Carolina) and No. 16 (Florida State) Ds. Would Ohio State beat all those teams? In a one game shot, I think so, but ask the Gators about the cumulative effect of playing a nasty defense week in and week out. Ask LSU what it's like to play road games at Florida, at Auburn, at Tennessee and at Arkansas.

4. The best wide receivers quarterbacks the Buckeyes faced were ?
As far as the receivers, the two best were Limas Sweed of Texas and James Hardy of Indiana. Quarterback-wise, Colt McCoy has improved by leaps and bounds since the September 9th game and is making far better decisions, but he wasn't nearly as good in the early meeting with OSU. Drew Tate and Drew Stanton have been major disappointments. That?s it as far as the decent quarterbacks the Buckeyes have faced, not to mention the receivers. We still haven?t seen what the secondary can do against a team with a high-octane passing attack like Tennessee, Notre Dame, Louisville, or just about anyone in the Pac 10. It?s not a stretch to suggest that Penn State would?ve won on September 23rd if it had a mature, developed big-game quarterback.

3. The Texas and Iowa wins might not have been that great
Remember, we?re just talking theory here. Ohio State cemented its spot at number one after impressive performances at Texas and Iowa. As it turns out, Iowa is totally average, and Texas, while improved since earlier in the year (as is Ohio State), got bombed on by Baylor and Texas Tech and came within an eyelash of losing at Nebraska. Fine, so Texas really is good, and that 24-7 win in Austin is the best by anyone so far this year, but that?s the only truly impressive victory on the r?sum?, and will be until the Michigan game.

2. The BCS computers
The cold, calculating, unfeeling, uncaring computers in the BCS formula are supposed to take all subjectivity out of the equation. How many of the six have Ohio State No. 1? One. Who?s number one in five of the six polls? ?
1. Michigan
If you?re going to give Ohio State the benefit of the doubt and say it doesn?t blow out the decent teams (Bowling Green, Michigan State, Indiana and Minnesota don?t count) because that's not its style, then the same has to be said for Michigan. Run defense? No. 1 in America allowing just 28 yards per game. Wisconsin? Win, 27-13. Impressive road win? 47-21 over Notre Dame in a game that wasn?t even that close. If Ohio State is No. 1 in the nation, then Michigan is No. 1A. Fortunately, November 18th is just around the corner.

Unless it?s the 19th time The Fugitive or Jarhead is being shown today on Showtime, I don?t want repeats ? I want talk of a possible rematch between Michigan and Ohio State for the national title to stop, and I want it to stop right now. The two are playing in a few weeks. That?s it. That decides it. The loser shouldn?t get a second chance, the winner shouldn?t have to prove itself again, it?ll be done. Over. I?d rather see Boise State play the winner than see the two tussle again. College football is great because the regular season matters. There?s no excuse to have a 1996 Florida-Florida State do-over (the Gators beat the unbeaten Noles 52-20 in the Sugar Bowl for the national title after losing 24-21 in the regular season finale) even if it's a classic.

With that said, it?ll be interesting to see what happens if Ohio State wins by a last-second field goal. You?ll get some who?ll argue that they?d like to see what would happen if the two played on a neutral field. If Michigan wins, or it?s a blowout either way, forget about a rematch. However, if we have an Oklahoma-Oregon scenario with one of the teams losing on a botched call, get ready for part two.


 
I read this article yesterday, and I see where he is going with it and I can see his "theories"

However, #5 really aggrivates me because i've thought about that quite a bit, especially last year.

First, I do think the SEC is the best conference top/bottom. However, every year we hear about the SEC's defenses, and how awesome they are. But at the same time, when you look at the SEC offenses against one another, generally, they are ATROCIOUS! You could also say the reason the SEC defenses are so great top/bottom is because they are facing less than great offenses week in and week out.

This was also the scenario I feel, for the Big10 last year. We had the highest ranked average of offense in the Big10 a year ago. Now, the defenses, statistically, were not that good. Is that because they were downright BAD or because they were facing some of the best offenses in the nation week in and week out?

I think its a little bit of both for each conference to be honest. I do think the SEC has the best defenses in the country, but I dont know if the rankings they get are attributed to the actual greatness of their defenses. WVU and Wisconsin racked up points on two of the best defenses in the SEC last year in Georgia and Auburn in the bowl games.
 
Upvote 0
Magua;649758; said:
I read this article yesterday, and I see where he is going with it and I can see his "theories"

However, #5 really aggrivates me because i've thought about that quite a bit, especially last year.

First, I do think the SEC is the best conference top/bottom. However, every year we hear about the SEC's defenses, and how awesome they are. But at the same time, when you look at the SEC offenses against one another, generally, they are ATROCIOUS! You could also say the reason the SEC defenses are so great top/bottom is because they are facing less than great offenses week in and week out.

This was also the scenario I feel, for the Big10 last year. We had the highest ranked average of offense in the Big10 a year ago. Now, the defenses, statistically, were not that good. Is that because they were downright BAD or because they were facing some of the best offenses in the nation week in and week out?

I think its a little bit of both for each conference to be honest. I do think the SEC has the best defenses in the country, but I dont know if the rankings they get are attributed to the actual greatness of their defenses. WVU and Wisconsin racked up points on two of the best defenses in the SEC last year in Georgia and Auburn in the bowl games.
Another point to consider on the "stat padding" of defenses it that most teams schedule their cupcakes from geographically nearby mid majors. The MAC is a solid conference with a lot of explosive offenses, and virtually every Big Ten team plays at least one MAC school a year. SEC teams, on the other hand, play Sun Belt (the majority of which rate a notch below good D1AA teams) or C-USA squads.

If you were padding your defensive stats, who would you rather play? The MAC squads that have produced Roethlisberger, Leftwich, Frye, and Garret Wolfe, or a commuter college that picked up football five years ago?
 
Upvote 0
I posted in a thread yesterday that I don't give much weight to Fiutak's articles. He's an unabashed scUM fan, and it too often is readily apparent in his writing that his columns are more based on allegiance to his team than they are objective journalism. He's the worst part of CFN (a site that I really like) IMO.
 
Upvote 0
Well if you think about it, Ohio State has been so dominant this year that they need to find SOMETHING to write about.

I wouldn't worry about this too much. The only truly relevant point he makes is the one about Michigan. They are pretty much the only thing holding OSU back at this point and that's because The Game hasn't been played.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyeboy;649773; said:
I posted in a thread yesterday that I don't give much weight to Fiutak's articles. He's an unabashed scUM fan, and it too often is readily apparent in his writing that his columns are more based on allegiance to his team than they are objective journalism. He's the worst part of CFN (a site that I really like) IMO.


"Note that Fiu voted tOSU #1, he has written the article solely for the sake of argument. So please refrain from blasting him."


I think you missed the first part of BB73's post....
 
Upvote 0
Well, there are a couple of salient points. First, the B10 is NOT the conference that was hyped at the beginning of the season. the B10 was supposed to have the most experienced quarterbacks this year, and many of them have underachieved (Iowa, MSU, Minny). Minny beating North Dakota State by a last second field goal (10-9) and Indy losing to Southern Illinois, etc. didn't help the conference's rep. And, Michigan and OSU have been far and away better than the other 9 teams (although Mich's scores are not indicative), that there is a 'seems to be' a larger spread.

The 'proof of the pudding' will be the bowl games (at least in my mind's eye). If we win the majority (say 5-2) AND the biggies - OSU in Tempe, and Meatchicken in the Rose), then the rest of the year will be forgotten.

And yes, the writer writes for an argument, not to heap praise on a team. I do chuckle when he 'qualifies' himself before the article, saying that he did vote for OSU as #1. Shows that the Buckeye Nation takes their team pretty seriously, and these writer guys don't want the nasty e-mails or responses to their articles.

:gobucks3: :gobucks4: :banger:
 
Upvote 0
calibuck;649800; said:
And yes, the writer writes for an argument, not to heap praise on a team. I do chuckle when he 'qualifies' himself before the article, saying that he did vote for OSU as #1. Shows that the Buckeye Nation takes their team pretty seriously, and these writer guys don't want the nasty e-mails or responses to their articles.

:gobucks3: :gobucks4: :banger:

Would you? I wouldn't want to write an article and then have people flaming me for it ESPECIALLY when I don't think that is necessarily the case....
 
Upvote 0
calibuck;649800; said:
...And yes, the writer writes for an argument, not to heap praise on a team. I do chuckle when he 'qualifies' himself before the article, saying that he did vote for OSU as #1. Shows that the Buckeye Nation takes their team pretty seriously, and these writer guys don't want the nasty e-mails or responses to their articles.

:gobucks3: :gobucks4: :banger:


By "qualifying himself" he basically pre-filtered out all of the reasonable responses he might have received. Rational OSU fans will see the disclaimer and not bother to refute any points. Only the extreme goofs will write to him about this.

Don't be surprised if the responses are portrayed as a fair sampling of Buckeye Nation at some point.

Not that I really care mind you. I've never written to any sports-writer about anything; and I highly doubt that I ever will.
 
Upvote 0
Writers are judged by amount of fan response

Learned long ago that good news doesn't sell newspapers, but bad news, scandal, etc. does. Daddy Big Bucks hit the nail on the head, but his disclaimer, he as much as admits he's writing the article to put ink on paper (and stir the pot). As long as he's factually correct (and not libelous), then his editor prints it. Buckeye Mike is also correct in that he's inciting the Buckeye Nation to respond........Mike I wouldn't write something inflamatory like that either, ESPECIALLY if I don't believe it truly (something he admits he doesn't). But he's paid to fill space, and he may have lauded and applauded the Buckeyes to high heaven already, so what does he write now?

I get a chuckle out of the writers that are saying that Michigan 'is more physical than OSU' (on the lines). Also wasn't it no less an expert than Gary Barnett that said that 'OSU is more wide open an offense than Michigan, more fancy'. Well, yeah, we actually throw to more than one wide-out, and do end arounds, and actually run outside the tackles.

(If one wants to see cyberspace ink and stuff written merely to tweak the nose of another viewer, check out the horse puckey that was written on the Texas-OSU game). One of the most prolific BSers (from Texas), admitted (after the OSU victory) that most of it was 'for entertainment value'. I read the article the author wrote, and was upset, then amused after I reread the opening line. Purely entertainment value.......and for his paycheck.

:gobucks3: :gobucks4: :banger: Remove all doubt, Smash Michigan. (I'll probably hold my breath until the final gun, however). Too much history of them knocking us out of the Rose Bowl, or National Championship. Don't think it'll happen this time, but when Biatchapuka (I know it's mispelled) gutted us for over 300 yards, I worry.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top