Lula Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 10M to both schools in scholarships plus another 10M to winner. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davearm Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Sounds more like a cheap publicity stunt to me. thumbs_d Gateway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 The NCAA already rejected it. Any way, one last time: LSU is the National Champions! All of the coaches agreed on the BCS system to determine the National Championship before the season started, with the winner of the Sugarbowl being THE National Champion. Beisdes that, LSU 13-1, USC 12-1. LSU had the tougher schedule. LSU won its Conference Championship game, USC doesn't even play one. The AP (media) created a nonexistant controvery for its own promotion and benefit. Story over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: The NCAA already rejected it. Any way, one last time: LSU is the National Champions! All of the coaches agreed on the BCS system to determine the National Championship before the season started, with the winner of the Sugarbowl being THE National Champion. Beisdes that, LSU 13-1, USC 12-1. LSU had the tougher schedule. LSU won its Conference Championship game, USC doesn't even play one. The AP (media) created a nonexistant controvery for its own promotion and benefit. Story over. BUZZZ - WRONG Answer! LSU is the BCS National champion. USC is the AP National champion. SPLIT NATIONAL CHAMPIONS. And until there is a playoff system, the idea of having a "National Champion" is a joke! LSU has a pretty little piece of crystal that means squat to all but the fans, alumni and 'athletic supporters' of the LSU. As far as the Conference Championship game, the REAL reason the "conference championship game" was created - $$$$$. IMO, it is absurd for anyone to be complaining that the championship game hinders their NC hopes or about conferences without one. You want the extra money, you have to take the consequences with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 I'm beginning to like this Dragon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davearm Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman:LSU won its Conference Championship game, USC doesn't even play one. I still don't understand why everyone assumes that beating out half the teams in the conference, then winning a Conference Championship game (as LSU and KState did) is more difficult than beating out all the other teams in the conference (as USC and the other "Big 6" conference champions did). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Coffeeman: I'm beginning to like this Dragon... dont worry the "Sisters" with get him brow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 davearm: Gman:LSU won its Conference Championship game, USC doesn't even play one. I still don't understand why everyone assumes that beating out half the teams in the conference, then winning a Conference Championship game (as LSU and KState did) is more difficult than beating out all the other teams in the conference (as USC and the other "Big 6" conference champions did). Do some research. First of all, USC did not win all of its conference games. They lost to California. I hope that you honestly don't believe that the PAC 10 is nearly as good as the SEC.SEC has 12 teams PAC 10 has 10 SEC has 5 teams in the top 25, (1 LSU, 6 Georgia, 14 Ole Miss, 16 Tenn, 25 Florida) PAC 10 has 2 in the top 25 (2 USC, 9 Wash. St.) The record of LSU's SEC opponents totals 68-49. The record of USC's PAC 10 opponents totals 49-51. All of these are just additional reasons that it is a no contest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: All of these are just additional reasons that it is a no contest. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, as long as you are:a - aware that it is only your opinion, and not "fact". b - aware that it is wrong. :P Psssst, by the way, LSU didn't win all of their conference games either. And conference strength does not have anything to do with how good either team is. SEC may have been tougher this year, but that doesn't mean that USC can't be a better team than LSU. It is merely an inaccurate, ambiguous crutch for homers to argue over which team is better. There is only one way to know which team is better and the reality is, we will never know. Thus, a SPLIT NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman, I would agree that the SEC was stronger overall than the Pac10 this year, but it still does not "prove" that LSU is therefore better than USC and deserving of an "undisputed" NC title. Are you high? If so, stop bogarting that joint and share the love! Any statistical comparison you want to make is useless, as it results in a "paper champion" at best. Its the same kind of bonehead logic that put OU in the Sugar instead of USC, thereby denying us a chance to see the two "real" best teams play it out on the field. Since the NCAA won't allow the big $30 Million game we'll never know for sure who's the best, so please allow all the kids their moment in the sun, okay? Let me ask you a question that you should really think hard about: if your son or daughter, or even you personally, had the glory of calling themself co-National Champs in some sport, would you shoot them down by trying to prove how their competition got robbed of the undisputed title? I doubt it, but if so, you will make a fine father of a mass-murderer someday.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davearm Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 You completely missed the point I was making GMan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 USC would destroy LSU. Take nothing away from LSU but USC as much as I hate to say it, is a darn fine example to the total package. Too bad we'll never know. frown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojanmojo Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Clubfoothead: USC would destroy LSU. Take nothing away from LSU but USC as much as I hate to say it, is a darn fine example to the total package. Too bad we'll never know. Spoken like a proud Trojan fan. cool_thu :P BTW, LOVE your sig! brow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Trojanmojo: Clubfoothead: USC would destroy LSU. Take nothing away from LSU but USC as much as I hate to say it, is a darn fine example to the total package. Too bad we'll never know. Spoken like a proud Trojan fan. cool_thu :P BTW, LOVE your sig! brow angry but a fact is a fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojanmojo Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Clubfoothead: Trojanmojo: Clubfoothead: USC would destroy LSU. Take nothing away from LSU but USC as much as I hate to say it, is a darn fine example to the total package. Too bad we'll never know. Spoken like a proud Trojan fan. BTW, LOVE your sig! brow angry but a fact is a fact. Oh, I totally agree with you. thumbs_u BTW, did I mention I love your sig? wink Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 davearm: You completely missed the point I was making GMan. Which was? BTW, once again, USC did not win all of its conference games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: BTW, once again, USC did not win all of its conference games. Psssst (Again), neither did LSU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Clubfoothead: USC would destroy LSU. Take nothing away from LSU but USC as much as I hate to say it, is a darn fine example to the total package. Too bad we'll never know. Regardless of the fact that LSU is the National Champion, the best way to determine who would beat who on a neutral field is to run computer simulations since the game will never take place. And the verdict is....... LSU WINS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojanmojo Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: davearm: You completely missed the point I was making GMan. Which was? BTW, once again, USC did not win all of its conference games. Who cares? shrug Both teams lost one game. I don't think it really matters if it was to a team in or out of conference. What if Notre Dame was one of the 2 teams? Conference wouldn't even have been an issue with them. Nothing you say can take away from the FACT that USC IS the AP National Champion. LSU is not. The sportswriters (who cover this stuff as their jobs) voted for USC, not LSU. That's just reality. You can argue this 'til you're blue in the face but that will never change this fact. Maybe if you had beaten OU in as convincing a fashion as we beat Michigan, you'd have been the AP Champs. Alas, you didn't. Congrats on your title. I'm quite happy with ours. ..and I'm quite certain that if we DID play, you'd be on the receiving end of a serious pounding. Be glad we didn't. wink Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: Regardless of the fact that LSU is the CO - National Champion , the best way to determine who would beat who on a neutral field is to run computer simulations No, the best way to determine the better team would be to LET THEM PLAY. But since this ain't happening, everything else is purely conjecture. But since you are insistent on a computer simulation, let me go break out my Playstation 2 - NCAA 2003 and pit LSU versus USC. . . . . . . . Oh wait a minute, USC beats LSU 34-17 in EA Sports NCAA 2003 at a neutral site. IT MUST BE TRUE, A COMPUTER SAID SO! lol lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Dragon is my hero... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Coffeeman: Dragon is my hero... Don't get all mushy. On November 27, 2004 I will hate USC with the intensity of a white hot flame. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gman Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Dragon: Gman: Regardless of the fact that LSU is the CO - National Champion , the best way to determine who would beat who on a neutral field is to run computer simulations No, the best way to determine the better team would be to LET THEM PLAY. Please don't edit my statement: Regardless of the fact that LSU is the National Champion, the best way to determine who would beat who on a neutral field is to run computer simulations since the game will never take place. Anyway, I do respect the season that USC had and congrats on such a fine season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: ...since the game will never take place. Feel better now. :P But since this ain't happening, everything else is purely conjecture. Oh wait a minute, USC beats LSU 34-17 in EA Sports NCAA 2003 at a neutral site. IT MUST BE TRUE, A COMPUTER SAID SO! Or maybe not. GMAN, nothing personal. But there is a difference between being loyal to your team and twisting logic in an attempt to substantiate your overzealous statements. Statements which you seemed to have represented as facts rather than opinion. If your statments are merely your opinion... thumbs_u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davearm Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Gman: davearm: You completely missed the point I was making GMan. Which was? BTW, once again, USC did not win all of its conference games. I thought it was pretty clear, but I'll spell it out for you: In the Big 12 and SEC, to be Conference Champs, a team must: * have a better conference record than (i.e., "beat out") half the teams in the league (namely, the other 5 in its division), and * win one game against the best team from the opposite division. In the Big 10, Pac 10, Big East, and (current) ACC, to be outright Conference Champs, a team must: * have a better conference record than (i.e., "beat out") all of the other teams in the league. (Did you catch the distinction there between "beat out" and "beat"?) The prevailing opinion seems to be that the SEC/Big 12 format is inherently more difficult than the Big 10/Pac 10/Big East/ACC format, apparently owing to the extra burden of winning the Conference Championship game. You yourself expressed this very sentiment in the post I quoted. Now for the juicy part: In my opinion, this is nonsense and a complete misconception. They're two different systems, yes, but by no means is one inherently more challenging than the other, much less obviously so. Notice how I never made any judgements about the relative strengths of the SEC vs. the Pac 10, or LSU vs. USC? Yet your response was 100% focused on proving the SEC better than the Pac 10, and LSU better than USC, even to the point of emphasizing (more than once) that USC lost a conference game. THUS YOU COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.