Hang on sloopy...

When you live in Columbus, Ohio, it's impossible not to have an opinion about the state of college football, as well as at least a cursory knowledge of what's going on in the Big Ten, as well some vague sense that the Big 10 and SEC are light years ahead of all the other conferences on the planet.

I think that's sweet of the people up here; they're territorial, and why shouldn't they be? After all, what you hang onto in Columbus is frequently characterized by Natty Light and O-H-I-O, so you better make the most of that while you can. Discount beer doesn't grow on buckeye trees, you know.

Now I'm being harsh, and probably unreasonable. Everyone is thrilled to death about arguably the biggest football game ever conceived in the history of college football, and I can't blame them for handing out the "Troy Smith for Czar, Ginn for Prime Minister" flyers that I've seen around campus. There's nothing hotter than seeing two athletes in their prime donning Russian apparel.
Alright, so I just made that last part up. I made the examples particularly absurd so you could get a feeling for the strangeness that is Columbus right now, which has culminated in me selling my tickets to the Game for what will probably end up being close to a month's rent. Nice.

But I would be remiss to leave here without some hard-hitting analysis of what should happen to the loser of the OSU/UM game, as well as my thoughts about the state of the powerhouse conferences today.

Everyone criticizes the Pac-10, and rightly so; their top team, USC, doesn't really like to play any defense, and managed to lose to a team that lost to Boise State, which means that now Boise State has some sort of ridiculous probability of being in a BCS game despite the fact that they recently just barely squeaked by San Jose State. But hey, everyone has their flaws, and San Jose State did beat Stanford. Boise State is a great example of learning by doing: they learned quickly that it's not a good idea to go on the road and try to beat an SEC team, but any time you can sucker a local Pac-10/Mountain West team into a high scoring contest, your style of ball will probably win. Boise State scared Louisville at the Liberty Bowl a few years ago, if only for the fact that Louisville committed four turnovers and went for it on fourth-and-1 at their own 17. I thought for sure that Bobby Petrino had become Hal Mumme for a quick time.

But we should get back to criticizing the Pac-1o, which is a great deal of fun except for the dirty little fact: the fact that we should be criticizing the Big 12, which is the worst big conference around.

Let's look at their non-conference games of note:

Iowa State: lost to Iowa.
Oklahoma State: lost to Houston.
Colorado: lost to MONTANA STATE, a I-AA school.
Texas: lost to Ohio State by 17 at HOME
Oklahoma: the only respectible one of the crew, lost to Oregon in a B.S. manner, but beat Washington.
Kansas State: lost to Louisville by 18 at HOME, but beat Texas.
Kansas: lost to Toledo.
Missouri: beat Ole Miss.
Nebraska: blown out by USC.
Texas Tech: lost to TCU. Beat UTEP.
Baylor: lost to Washington State, Army, and TCU.
A & M: beat Army.

So the Big 12 basically didn't beat a single good team except for maybe Washington that was out of conference. They sure got plastered by a bunch of them, though. Even the Pac-1o didn't show up this poorly: USC's wins over Arkansas and Nebraska carry the conference, which was supposed to have two standard-bearers, except Cal forgot to show up at Tennessee. Who cares, Cal is always good for a nice fail anyway.

We could get on the Big East's case, but West Virginia, Louisville, and Rutgers have beat Kansas State, Kentucky, Miami (FL), Maryland, Illinois, North Carolina, and Mississippi State, so at least there are some quality wins around.

Alright, point made. The SEC and the Big 10 are the best two conferences, with the Big East riding shotgun because WVU stomped Maryland. The ACC has a bunch of good teams, and the Pac-10's alright.

So the best team in the Big 10 should probably play the best in the SEC, provided the best in the SEC isn't Arkansas, in which case USC should get the nod because of the head-to-head de-cleating of the Hogs that took place earlier. I like Florida here: their score against Auburn was sort of misleading because of bad offense; their defense is pretty sweet. Of course, the Gators almost lost to South Carolina last week, but the Gamecocks have to be the best .500 team in the country. I think they've had the most difficult schedule in the country. South Carolina has played Georgia, Florida, Clemson, Tennessee, Auburn, and Arkansas. That's ultra-harsh.

Why can't we put OSU in the title game if they lose to Michigan? It's pretty basic: we don't even know if OSU is the second-best team in the Big 10 at that point; Wisconsin has a legitimate logical stake to that claim due to their close performance against the Wolverines.

Why don't we throw the Wolverines right back into the fire?

That's the better question, and it's the one that deserves a more reasonable answer. The Wolverines, should they lose, will have a legitimate claim to a rematch in the sense that Ohio Stadium is hardly a neutral site. But college football (and, for that matter, the NFL) ain't about no neutrality, and winning on the road is part of the game.

Still, the best answer I heard to why Michigan shouldn't get a rematch came from someone with a more unbiased perspective, a grad student from Costa Rica.

"You're trying to figure out who the best team in the country is, right? Shouldn't Ohio State play someone else, from a logical perspective? We know Michigan isn't the best, because they lost to the Buckeyes."

I couldn't have said it better; it's so basic, but it really captures the idea best. Notre Dame doesn't get a re-match because they were dominated by both OSU and Michigan within the past year. Expect 900 yards of total offense for either OSU or Michigan if they play Notre Dame again this year. Just giving you guys a heads up.

There's only one problem; that problem resides in New Jersey. If Rutgers wins out, they'll have a pretty decent claim to the title game. Of course, there's not a soul on the planet who thinks this team can honestly beat OSU, Michigan, or even USC, but that's beside the point. The point is that they should have an opportunity, just like Utah should have had an opportunity to play a legit BCS team a few years ago. I propose that, should Rutgers beat WVU (which is pretty doubtful), they play the loser of the OSU/Michigan game. But the way the BCS is set up, they'll probably get to play the winner of the ACC, which should be a good enough measure of how good Rutgers is.

Give me my Heisman watch: Troy Smith, Ray Rice, and Steve Slaton (sans Louisville second half). Those are the three best players left. Sorry, Brady Quinn, but you've got to come up bigger against big teams. Hunter Cantwell could throw for three TD's a game and no picks against Air Force, UNC, Stanford and the like as well.

Oh, and I end with a shoutout to UK QB Andre Woodson: you're a future star.

College football, recognize. I'm back.