GWPFFL BrianW

My only point in 1998 though is that Florida State beat Tech, and thus earned the automatic bid. It's not like the ACC got 2 automatic bids or something. I say that this is the biggest BCS abortion ever, because ESPN was promoting a rematch almost immediately after LSU kicked hte game winning fg in tuscaloosa. Nebraska in 2001 was a very close 2nd . Oklahoma at least was IN their conference championship game in 2003. Also Auburn was 2004 and the teams ahead were OU and USC, not USC and Texas. And as much as I think Auburn had every right to be there in that game, USC and Oklahoma were equally deserving because they WON THERE CONFERENCE. For god sakes people, win your freaking conference!

Florida State did win the ACC in 1998. They were 7-1 in conference play with Georgia Tech, and won their head to head meeting. They earned the automatic bid. You are right about Nebraska in 2001 and Oklahoma in 2003. And you know what, I b|tched about it then, and I'm b|tching about it now. And for the record, yes ESPN and CBS didn't do Oklahoma State, or anyone else besides Alabama any favors. I got a kick out of watching OSU-OU on Saturday night, as OSU is absolutely dismantling them, and the whole time, you have the ESPN scroll on the bottom every 5 minutes talking about how ESPN is projecting the rematch. I find that to be absolutely absurd! You got Harris Poll voters, WATCHING the game, and ESPN is telling them how they are going to vote. Worse yet is CBS, but what can you expect from them? edit to add: You did say "outrright" you need to add Ohio State in 2002 to that list. They didn't win the Big Ten outright that year.

LSU's defense kept those fg's very long, and blocked one of them, plus Bama was at home. The stars were aligned for the Tide in that game, and they still failed to get the W. Now LSU is forced to have to beat this team again? What a horrible system.

I've long been a proponent of a 12 team system, with the top 4 conference champions getting byes. I've always said that the BCS is for the most part an excellent way of ranking teams (just not a fair system for how we currently decide "national champions") If Alabama met LSU in the championship of a playoff like that, then who am I to argue? But if you're saying that in THIS exclusive system, then the system as a whole is grossly unfair. Humans set the pecking order in August based on nothing that happened on the field. Nothing at all. You'll find that the same people that were against a rematch between Michigan and Ohio State, are totally cool with it now. Some have been consistent. Others have not. You know who you are.

"Quality Losses" is an oxymoron. As far as I'm concerned though, Boise is more deserving than Alabama. They actually played Georgia. Bama didn't. Stanford on the other hand... not so much. I put a big emphasis on taking care of business, as in, winning your conference. This is what I don't understand. You're gonna say there are only 2 teams playing in this game, shouldn't their be some minimum requirements?

I prefer to look at it in a much simpler way. Oklahoma State: More quality WINS, and actually won their conference Alabama: Not as many quality wins, and finished 2nd in their division. The ONLY reason Alabama is in this game is because they were picked to be in this game back in August. NOTHING Alabama did on the field warrants them being in over Oklahoma State. All they can point to is a quality LOSS, which is an oxymoron. This is the biggest miscarriage of justice in BCS history. I guess the regular season is a "playoff" only if the team that ESPN and the rest of the media wants it to be.

Ok, let me rephrase. Almost every "expert" and most fans outside of the state of florida, thought ohio state was going to win that game. My only point is, the idea that anyone was saying that the SEC was going to get exposed in any of these title games, is ridiculous. If anything I've said the opposite. Oklahoma in 08 and Oregon last year come to mind as teams who I thought were going to be the ones exposed by SEC defenses. Irregardless, the SEC's record in "national championship" games is not a reason that in a system where only 2 teams gets in, that it should be 2 teams from the same conference. Like I said, it's the biggest miscarriage of justice in BCS history.

Alabama's best win is Arkansas? Not impressed. Oklahoma State won its conference. Bama couldn't even win it's division. Bama simply got anointed a spot in this game before ANY team, even played a down of football, back in August when the coaches poll came out. They were playing with stacked dice.

Of course, the analogy doesn't work, since the Giants proceeded to win 3 playoff games before they got that rematch with New England. Alabama has done nothing this year. They got ranked high before the season started and proceeded to play the weakest SEC schedule you could have given them (they missed South Carolina and Georgia).

Don't think I ever said an SEC team was going to be exposed. 2006 I, like EVERYONE else, thought Ohio State would thump Florida. LSU, I thought Ohio State had a chance, but LSU was playing a virtual home game, so I really wasn't shocked by that, plus that was a very weak OSU team. 08 I was pretty confident UF was gonna handle Oklahoma. 09 I thought Bama would win, but I liked Texas's chances. Last year, I knew that Chip Kelly's duck tricks wouldn't work against an SEC defense (even one as weak as Auburns) because they didn't work on the previous big stages that his teams were apart of. Boise State and Ohio State had already exposed Oregon, and LSU did it once again this year.

Miscarriage of justice. Basically, you guys snowballed me. Everything you said needed to happen for Okie State to get in, happened, and it still didn't happen. Based on an "eyeball" test, you could come to conclusion that Alabama is #2. However, based on EVERYTHING on the field, how in the world can this happen? Oklahoma State has a better resume in every way you want to look at it. This is worse than 2001.

Is this like re-inventing the wheel? Why is Urban held to some other standard than the endless list of other coaches who do this? Certainly you aren't shocked by any of this, or any other coach that does this?

Big 12 is the deepest conference this year. SEC's claim to fame is they have 2 extreme heavy hitters on the top. But overall the SEC is 4 deep, and Arkansas isn't that good and Georgia got lucky missing LSU, Bama, and Arkansas. SEC East is pretty much a joke, though not near the joke the Big 12 North was in the middle of the last decade. With all of that said, Alabama still doesn't deserve to be anywhere near any type of national championship game under this system, but this is the BCS, the most flawed system ever developed. BTW Rocker, you say a playoff would make the end of the regular season meaningless... I give you this weekends batch of games. Thanks to the BCS, this is the first time that I can remember where there is literally no meaning. LSU vs Bama is all but set in stone regardless of the outcome of the SEC CG, which I'm told by almost all SEC fans, is the hottest ticket in the south. I'm also curious to know what your true feelings would be if the most undeserving team of all time, Alabama, beats LSU in that mythical national title game. Would you, as a solid LSU fan still think the BCS is a better system than a playoff system of 8-12 teams? This is also an argument against conference title games too and why they are nothing more than designs to make money, no more no less. Clemson took care of business against Va Tech already, and Sparty took care of Wisconsin. They're forced to beat these teams again just to get a lucrative BCS spot. Now wouldn't it be interesting if the AP voters decided that LSU's body of work (one of the most impressive I've ever seen btw) is so good that even if they were to lose to Alabama, they still decided to give the nod to LSU. Wondering if any Tiger fans would change their tune about 2003.

I'm not sure what USC being selected as "best of the decade" by any opinion publication has to do with anything. Your argument is what were they before Bush? As far as I can see, they had 2 really good years (1988 and 2002 with pretty solid years in 1989 and the keyshawn team in 1995) in that 20+ year stretch that SEC cited earlier. USC was pretty much a middle of the pack pac 10 team. So your argument doesn't hold much water if you're looking at Post-years that anyone cares about to Pre-2003.

I haven't changed my tune. Alabama being all but in right now is the 2nd biggest miscarriage of justice in BCS history, behind Nebraska getting in in 2001. And if Georgia beats LSU, and it's still LSU vs Alabama, then it is the biggest miscarriage of justice in BCS history. Tell me something, what has Alabama done besides get ranked really high (shocker preseason polls rear their ugly head) before they even took a snap? They lost at home to LSU in a game that set football back about 30 years (the forward pass is legal now ya know). They beat Penn State in non conference who got absolutely drilled by Wisconsin, so their non conference win wasn't that great. They beat Arkansas, who is probably the most overrated team in the country and likely will get drilled by whoever they play in the bowl game. SEC beyond those 3 and Georgia (who they didn't play) is pretty weak. SEC is 4 deep. I've said it before, I'll say it again, in this system, the most exclusive system in all of sports, the goal shouldn't be getting the "best 2 teams", it should be getting the 2 most deserving teams. Alabama may very well be the 2nd best team in the nation, but they had their shot (at home no less) and they failed. Alabama is not deserving. They were annointed a spot in this game back in August, and weren't punished when they failed. Worse yet, if Alabama beats LSU, they will be, by far the most undeserving national champion of all time and i't's not even close.