At first it seemed like a sweet concept. Top-ranked Ohio State and No. 2 Michigan play for the Big Ten title Nov. 18, and if the game is a classic, they line up again for the national championship.
Big Ten heaven, right? The Midwest would be the epicenter of college football. It would be like the treatment ESPN gives the Yankees and Red Sox–no other teams matter.
Then I thought about it. And now it seems like the worst idea since: “Now starting at quarterback, Craig Krenzel . . . “
For starters, it wouldn’t be fair to the winning team. Say Michigan upsets Ohio State. Now the Wolverines have to beat the Buckeyes again? It’s nearly impossible to take down a good team twice in the same season.
I covered Notre Dame in 1997 and remember this stunning result: Notre Dame 24, LSU 6. Six weeks later, in the god-awful Independence Bowl, the final score was LSU 27, Notre Dame 9.
Give coaches like Jim Tressel (below) six weeks to prepare for a rematch and the game film becomes plated in gold. Plus the losing team gains a giant edge in motivation.
Remember what happened in 1996? Second-ranked Florida State beat No. 1 Florida in the second-to-last game of the regular season. Five weeks later, the Gators thrashed the Seminoles in the Sugar Bowl 52-20.
So on top of the fairness issue, we would have the promise of a lopsided national title game.
Here are two other problems with the rematch scenario: It would put a team that didn’t win its own conference in the BCS title game.
Nebraska pulled that trick in 2001 (thanks to the BCS’ then-flawed formula) and the result was a lousy Rose Bowl: Miami 37, Nebraska 14.
Plus part of the beauty of bowl games is matching conference vs. conference. When West Virginia beat Georgia in the Sugar Bowl last year, it was a defining moment for the Big East.
Some SEC coaches still probably believe their second-team defenses could shut down the Yankee schools. There’s only one way to find out.
Bottom line: a Michigan-Ohio State rematch wouldn’t be “The Godfather: Part II.” It would be “Weekend at Bernie’s II.” Please spare us.
