USC Got Screwed

[Sgt. Ryan]

Kansas State 2000:

 

Sgt. Ryan:

OU lost this game, but based on the way the other conferences are set up, they are the Big 12 champs.

I bet to differ. Chill KSU.

 

IF this was the pac ten or Lil ten, this game would have been just another Reg season game. KSU had 2 big 12 loses to OUs 1. OU would be Big 12 champs, but because we have a title game that determines the championship even if the teams are not equal in record. In the Pac-10 and Lil ten the final record in the conference determines the Champs in those conferences was my point.

 

KSU is the Big 12 Champs, without question. They won the Championship game. Im not arguing that.

 

 

The Big 12 Championship game, as its been shown by the BCS is nothing more than the last Reg season game in the NFL once the #1 seed already has home field wrapped up. Even if they lose, they are still #1. So losing doesnt penalize them, overall. But Im sure Stoops and Co wanted the Big 12 Trophy. But Id think even coach Snyder would rather win the BCS Championship trophy than the Big 12 conference Championship game trophy.

 

 

Also those that argue a team that doesnt wins its conference Championship game, that only 2 conferences have shouldnt play for the Title. I have one thing to ask. If there was a playoff would you say the same thing. A team that doesnt win its conference doesnt deserve to be playing in the playoff. Also, just look at the NFL, Are you telling me that if a Wildcard team wins the superbowl, they are really not the Champs if they didnt win their division.

 

There plain and simple needs to be a playoff. Split titles and coaches/AP polls penalizing teams who lose late rather than to lesser teams early on and the Computers all have to go. None of this is really fair, and there really isnt any way to fix it until you get rid of Championship games, or every conference has one. And you pit the best teams on the field in the end. And lets really break this down.

 

 

And as far as this Rose bowl being a Title game, let me ask you this. If Michigan wins are the split champs. If both teams cant win the title in a game, it cant be a title game. And finally whos to say OU wont beat LSU by 30 and retake #1 in both the polls even if USC squeaks past Michigan by a few pts. Are you telling me teams cant flip flop in the polls even after a win. Yeah, thats never happened before.

[davearm]

Sgt. Ryan:

 

davearm:

USC didn't really want to play in the Sugar?

 

Oklahoma didn't have anything to play for?

 

Do you have any sense of how preposterous these statements are Ryan?

USC got left out because they were the 3rd best team, PERIOD. The polls reward teams that lose early and penalize teams that lose late.

 

Bottom line is this. The SEC and Big 12 have Conference Championship Games. OU lost this game, but based on the way the other conferences are set up, they are the Big 12 champs. OU beat Texas and had a better conference record than KSU or anyone else in the Big 12. If we had an even playing field then that would be one thing. But the way NCAA football is setup its kind of a joke that some conferences can penalize their teams in a game other conferences dont have.

 

 

Had OU not played in this game, or had they won the game, would USC be screwed because they were jumped by LSU. Clearly not the the level people are saying today.

I didn't need all that explained to me. But since you brought it up, the flipside to the whole "not a level playing field" argument is this: if USC had the opportunity to play WSU or whomever in a Pac-10 Championship game, and won, then either OU or LSU would be out of the Sugar. In that event it would make the most sense to bump OU, since they lost in their Championship game and LSU did not. Therefore your Sooners are very fortunate that there is no Pac-10 Championship Game.

 

Back to your original statements: what I was wondering was how on earth you got it in your head that USC didn't even want a spot in the Sugar.

 

Or how on earth the Sooners could look at the chance for a Conference Championship, an undefeated season, a guaranteed spot in the Sugar, a Heisman, and potentially even a rightful place amongst the greatest teams of OU history, and decide it's all "meaningless" (your term).

[Sgt. Ryan]

Correction

 

The game wasnt meaningless to the Sooners, but the outcome of the game was meaningless to the Sooners berth in the Sugar Bowl. And as a result the team played like it. Im not making excuses here, My sooners lost the game and deserve everything they are getting today as a result of the loss. But OU had the Sugar in their back pocket before this game was played.

 

It can be argued the pac ten helped the Sooners by not having a Conference Championship Game, but there is no argument OU would be in the Sugar if they didnt have one. And whos to say USC would have won the Pac ten title game anyway based on most "Any given Saturday" quotes. After the OU debacle nothing should be taken for granted as a given in college football. Bottom line is the Sooners have the right to play for the National Title. If they beat LSu they will be. USC isnt guaranteed of anything even if they win the game. The polls could put the winner of the Sugar bowl as #1 in the end. If its still spilt afterwards, then the system didnt work and there are 2 Champions.

[Kansas State 2000]

I'm going for OU to win mainly because I want to say we beat the National Champions by 28 points. cool_thu

[Sgt. Ryan]

Kansas State 2000:

I'm going for OU to win mainly because I want to say we beat the National Champions by 28 points.    cool_thu 

thumbs_u

 

Ill take that as well

[Kansas State 2000]

Sgt. Ryan:

 

Kansas State 2000:

I'm going for OU to win mainly because I want to say we beat the National Champions by 28 points.  cool_thu

thumbs_u

 

Ill take that as well

We have a shot to say we beat the 2004 National Champions and the 2003 National Champions in back to back games. eek!

[Trojanmojo]

Kansas State 2000:

 

Sgt. Ryan:

 

Kansas State 2000:

I'm going for OU to win mainly because I want to say we beat the National Champions by 28 points.      cool_thu   

thumbs_u

 

Ill take that as well

We have a shot to say we beat the 2004 National Champions and the 2003 National Champions in back to back games. eek! Good luck K-State. cool_thu I'm pulling for you guys to drill the Buckeyes. If you score more than 2 TDs you have a great chance at winning from what I've seen.

[Kansas State 2000]

Thanks.

 

I think the game may be a bit higher scoring then people think though.

[Dragon]

Eddie Lee Ivery:

 

Dragon:

I can't stand USC, but they did get screwed royally.  Should be LSU v USC.

No there should be a playoff of the top 4 teams. But there isn't. So under the confines of the current circumstances, LSU should be playing USC for the National title.

[Dragon]

Sgt. Ryan:

Heres the problem.  OU knew they were in the title game regardless and obviously played uninspired.

Now there's a quality that you look for in a championship team.

 

 

Also,  College football would never admit this, but you pit OU vs USC, or OU vs LSU, and the line would be OU giving up pts to either team.  Who do you think has a better grip on whos better than who, Vegas or the coaches/writers who penalize teams who lose late in the yr.

This statement is so ludicrous - when exactly did you have your off-the-record talk with "Mr. College Football"?

 

 

 

For every sports writer that said OU was one of the top 5 best teams ever, the exact  same guys are saying this team doesnt deserve to be in the Sugar.  A Team doesnt go get this bad, this quickly.

Did you actually watch the game versus K-state? They don't deserve to go to the Sugar because there are two teams BETTER than Oklahoma!

 

 

If you saw the Pete Carroll interview, you saw hes happy as hell to be playing Michigan for a piece of the title, rather than OU or LSU.  He aint no dummy, we knock of the lil tens best in our own back yard or travel to NO and play LSU or OU.  If given the choice, hed lay up and stay in the Rose if he knew a piece of the title was his by playing Michigan instead of LSU or OU.

Yeah, that's the impression I got. You don't really understand what it's like to be a leader, do you?

 

 

Bottom line, this was in essence a meaningless game for OU, like it is to NFL teams the last week of the yr once home field is wrapped up.  They had lil to gain, and nothing to lose if they dropped an egg.

lol Button up, your ignorance is showing.

[Coffeeman]

Holy s-hitcakes again - when Sooners lose, Sarge totally loses grip on reality! Too funny, but let's be smart now - do you know WHY teams get penalized by losing late, Sarge? Because you should have your **** together in December, that's why! LSU and USC do, OU does not, plain and simple...

 

Your team lost the conference championship to a 3-loss team in DECEMBER, when the Sooners were trying to go undefeated and rank with some of the best teams in HISTORY - don't try to tell me Stoops didn't have them fired up for this game, dumbass! They just got beat like a redheaded stepchild, and they are the consensus #3 team now, not #1. Now Sarge has to hope for USC to lose and OU to win to have an "undisputed" NC team. It is no longer in the Sooners' hands - and believe me, that place sucks. I had to root for the stinking Irish this Saturday, to no avail, and it nearly killed me!

 

I guess Sarge and all the LSU/OU backers become Wolverine fans now on Jan. 1, because their teams need HELP to be considered the true NC. Meanwhile, #1 USC is in control of their own destiny so to speak, in that the most they can hope for now is a split-NC, and they get that with a win...

 

BTW, did anyone NOT see the catch by our #1 WR, plus the huge hit to spring Bush on the cutback run? Mr. Williams should be in the front row in NYC next week, but he'll probably get stiffed too...

[davearm]

Sgt. Ryan:

USC isnt guaranteed of anything even if they win the game.  The polls could put the winner of the Sugar bowl as #1 in the end.  If its still spilt afterwards, then the system didnt work and there are 2 Champions.

Here today we can state with certainty that the system doesn't work. Heck we could have concluded that back in August. And it can never work so long as in the end, only two teams come away with a shot at the title.

 

Frankly, the BCS formula does a pretty good job of ranking the teams, and for that purpose it (the formula) remains useful. The final BCS standings reflect the common belief that OU, LSU, and USC are all pretty close together, and that there's some separation between those three and #4 and beyond.

 

The problem comes when the good and useful formula is used to eliminate all but 2 teams.

 

Bottom line: the BCS can never be a system that "works" as long as it boils things down to only two teams, since in many years, more than two teams can make a legitimate case for getting a seat at the table.

 

I've said this before but I'll say it again. Put an 8-team playoff in place, and:

* use the BCS math to seed it;

* use the BCS Bowls as the First Round;

* play a neutral-site Final Four doubleheader the Saturday prior to the NFL's AFC and NFC Championship Games;

* play a true National Championship Game the weekend the NFL is off leading up to the Super Bowl.

 

Several other similar ideas have been tossed out, and any of them would be better than this current situation.

[Clubfoothead]

lol I'm all for a playoff as it would gaurantee my Wolverines the national title they deserve; however, IMHO, the two teams that should be in the Sugar Bowl are. Everyone will understand that once the Rose Bowl is over. smash

[Trojanmojo]

Clubfoothead:

  lol I'm all for a playoff as it would gaurantee my Wolverines the national title they deserve; however, IMHO, the two teams that should be in the Sugar Bowl are.  Everyone will understand that once the Rose Bowl is over.  smash 

Care to make a sigline wager on that? I'm quite confident we'll beat you in the RB.

[Clubfoothead]

Trojanmojo:

 

Clubfoothead:

lol    I'm all for a playoff as it would gaurantee my Wolverines the national title they deserve; however, IMHO, the two teams that should be in the Sugar Bowl are.  Everyone will understand that once the Rose Bowl is over.      smash

Care to make a sigline wager on that? I'm quite confident we'll beat you in the RB. thumbs_u You're on, for the month of January OK? No points, straight up Michigan over USC.

[Coffeeman]

Wow, ClubFH is in for some embarassment...

[Trojanmojo]

Clubfoothead:

 

Trojanmojo:

 

Clubfoothead:

    lol  I'm all for a playoff as it would gaurantee my Wolverines the national title they deserve; however, IMHO, the two teams that should be in the Sugar Bowl are.  Everyone will understand that once the Rose Bowl is over.    smash   

Care to make a sigline wager on that? I'm quite confident we'll beat you in the RB.

thumbs_u You're on, for the month of January OK? No points, straight up Michigan over USC. Sounds good to me. Good luck.

[Clubfoothead]

Coffeeman:

Wow, ClubFH is in for some embarassment...

Clear sign of a newbie, someone who thinks that would be anything new for me in these parts. lol

 

Good luck Trojan, nothing like the Pac10 vs. the Big10 in the granddaddy.

[Kansas State 2000]

It's funny how a K-State win turns the college football world upside down. lol

 

This place would be boring if Oklahoma had won by the 14 points they were favored.

[Caveman_Nick]

Sgt. Ryan:

USC got left out because they were the 3rd best team, PERIOD.  The polls reward teams that lose early and penalize teams that lose late.

 

The first part is just your opinion. I would cross out your PERIOD with the FACT that USC was voted #1 in both polls by peple that spend their lives watching/coaching/writing about college football. I give them the opinion edge.

 

Your second statement is very good and to the point, though. It is also probably true that this influences the voters. It most likely has to do with the people voting taking into consideration how well a team has responded throughout the entire season.

 

Finishing the season with an embarassing loss to a team you should have absolutely wolloped isn't going to get you lots of consideration.

 

In the end, I think we all agree that the BCS is flawed, and that there will never be a true national champion or a happy fan base until some playoff system is enacted.

 

All that said, I am not surprised at LSU jumping USC based on their handling of Georgia. I predicted it here, but was told I didn't know what I was talking about. However it works out, both the Sugar and Rose bowls will be great games to watch.

[untateve]

I would like to see LSU win. I'd like the NC to come from the SEC and the NC Team to have its only loss at the hands of the Gators.

 

I would also like to see USC win so that there is a split NC and hopefully move NCAA 1 step closer to a playoff system.

[URLACHERisGOD]

I would like to think that the reason that OU let KState win is because we hate Texas so much jester . Poor Longhorns...no BCS Bowl Game for you this year applause .

[xMRogers]

Two comments (and I never come in ehre, so feel free to ignore)

 

- has everyone not noticed the parallels of Michigan to KState - meaning, before Saturday, all anyone could talk about is how either LSU or USC is going to get screwed by the other one...pretty much giving OU their game. Now, it's all about a "split championship", pretty much giving USC their game....just food for thought

(I was picking USC over Oklahoma prior to Saturday, so still think USC will win - just pretty obvious to me that, as in the NFL, if you count out a top 10 team in a game, you're begging for the upset)

 

- USC got screwed for obvious reasons - but here's my biggest take on what's wrong with the BCS : How can a team go into a saturday needing a win to get to the national title game, win convincingly, and then because the team they were supposed to play in that game lost, end up not going to the game....or, put another way, how the he!! does Oklahoma losing mean LSU passes USC, which is what the end result of this was.

 

This is a joke, and we can talk about USC's schedule all day - they lost one early game and have dominated everyone else that was put in front of them. Oklahoma knew they had to win to be the convincing number 1 (and I guarantee Stoopes didn't tell his guys "I did the math, we can lose and still make it" partially because you would never do that as a coach, and partially because I doubt anyone was sure of that). They lost in a de-facto playoff game.

 

I do like the fact that it's 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3. If someone unfamiliar with college football came along, just saw the matchups in the paper, they'd think - "man, going to be a great title game after the semifinals"...

[Clubfoothead]

xMRogers:

I do like the fact that it's 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3. If someone unfamiliar with college football came along, just saw the matchups in the paper, they'd think - "man, going to be a great title game after the semifinals"...

thumbs_u take_a_b

[fish-boy]

Well the way all you guys are bad mouthing the BCS, you would think the old system was better??????????????

 

 

Lets look at the 1985 Champs(OU) for example.

 

The AP poll looked as follows before the bowl games that year:

#1 Penn State 11-0

#2 Miami (Fl) 10-1

#3 Okalhoma 10-1

#8 Tennessee 8-1-2

 

Penn and OU played in the Orange Bowl and Miami and Tenn played in the Sugar Bowl...

 

OU won and Tenn won, OU was the unamious champ.

 

Brings up the Question though, what if Miami wins???? Do they deserve the championship b/c they won vs a #8(prior bowl ranking)team.

 

Final AP Poll

#1 OU

#2 Mich

#3 Penn State

#4 Tennessee

#9 Miami

 

No system will be perfect in college football. If they put a playoff system in place how many teams will make the playoffs? 4? 6? 8?

 

How will they determine who makes the playoffs??? The top 4, 6, or 8 teams in the AP/BCS poll(s) (here we go again with the polls). So long as there is a poll there we never be a perfect system to go by......

 

NCAA Basketball works b/c they start the tourney with 64 teams, which is very unrealistic in football!!!

 

As college football fans we are at the mercy of those who get paid to make the decisions.