Sign in to follow this  
Rockerbraves

LSU vs WHO?

Recommended Posts

good stuff- an argument about the SEC playing a tough non conference- awesome stuff! the SEC has played a chit non conference for YEARS (except LSU, I give them props) and now SEC honks want to tout off their tough NC slate lol I love it. For years the SEC has hung their hat on their bad ass conference slate.....the SEC is fn notorious for not playing anyone out of conference and NOW that is their argument?? okay

 

sorry but OSU has more quality wins than Bama.period.end of story. There are solid arguments for Bama, but more quality wins is not one of them.

 

these things are cyclical - overall, the Big 12 was up this year - the SEC was down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This. How is the regular season a play-off? Bama lost the last time they played anyone good. What play-off works that way? What play-off rewards good losses?

Oklahoma State has no one to blame but themselves. If you recall SEC called for a playoff years ago and all the other conferences shot it down.

 

As a Tiger fan I am not pleased with Bama getting another shot either, however I do think they picked the 2 best teams to matchup considering how the SEC has dominated the BCS. Not sure what the line is going to be but if I were to guess LSU would have been favored over the Cowboys by double digits.

 

:wacko: Just saying...the BCS actually got it right this time even though many are getting tired of the SEC SEC chant that I am certain you will hear the night of the big game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come to the conclusion your not going to persuade SEC fans of anything, regardless if 99% of the population thinks they are delusional.

I came up with a better solution however......which makes 90% of them hypocrites

 

When Michigan lost to OSU , they ALL said , it's not fair to have a rematch , now they seem to support rematches LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've come to the conclusion your not going to persuade SEC fans of anything, regardless if 99% of the population thinks they are delusional.

I came up with a better solution however......which makes 90% of them hypocrites

 

When Michigan lost to OSU , they ALL said , it's not fair to have a rematch , now they seem to support rematches LOL

Please tell me which SEC fan base besides Bama are you referring to? People around here would have much preferred Ok St. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please tell me which SEC fan base besides Bama are you referring to? People around here would have much preferred Ok St. :wacko:

 

I would have preferred anyone but Bama.

 

Stanford would have been at the top of my list and then Boise as they need a shot at one of the big boys to shut them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look through recent posts, I indicated it should be Ok State playing. Bama had their chance and lost at home to LSU.

 

But be honest...isn't it kind of nice to know that the BCS NC will once again belong to the SEC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oklahoma State has no one to blame but themselves. If you recall SEC called for a playoff years ago and all the other conferences shot it down.

 

As a Tiger fan I am not pleased with Bama getting another shot either, however I do think they picked the 2 best teams to matchup considering how the SEC has dominated the BCS. Not sure what the line is going to be but if I were to guess LSU would have been favored over the Cowboys by double digits.

 

:wacko: Just saying...the BCS actually got it right this time even though many are getting tired of the SEC SEC chant that I am certain you will hear the night of the big game.

Let's be clear, I'm not pissed on behalf of OK St, so I don't care if their conference president is ultimately to blame why we don't have more of a play-off. I'm pissed for me. I'm not pissed because of the injustice. If I cared about injustice, I'd do something other than shlep food and drink for a living.

 

I'm pissed because nothing pisses me off more than crap that doesn't make sense. And nothing makes less sense than the BCS. Every argument made in favor of it sounds (likely because it is) some BS that someone is trying to make up to support something they know is a crock and hoping you're too stupid to recognize you're being fed a load of crap.

 

I mean, you've got the crock that is how we decide the championship, and then there's all the other games. Every single year, there's at least one BCS match-up that is far less compelling than plenty of non BCS games. In other words, we're eschewing a hughly entertaining and profitable play-off format so we can watch WVU v Clemson in the Orange Bowl and Va-freaking-Tech, straight off a 4 TD ass kicking play Michigan, the third best team in the Big 10.

 

The BCS, a format based on the coaches poll who ranked Va Tech a few spots ahead of Clemson despite having lost to them twice this year by a combined 61-13. I mean, I get it that sometimes you rank a team ahead of a team that beat them given the body of work and all. But if there's one thing that is abundantly clear and anyone worthy of a vote should understand this one simple fact. It's that Clemson is a better football team than Va Tech. And I don't care about either team. I'm not pissed on behalf of Clemson. I'm just pointing this out to show the caliber of people who are ultimately deciding who plays who in this effed up charade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do the coaches get to vote? the whole thing is a joke and this is proof.

 

I already watched the LSU/Alabam game this year, we already know who the better team is, they won on the road. Now how is playing another game on a neautral site going to add any more clarity? If Alabama wins then they will be number one? like I said, it is a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those agianst a rematch, let me ask a question I probably already know the answer to... Would you still not be interested in that matchup if it was the result of a playoff?

 

I've long thought that the BCS was set up so to get as much regional interest as possible by not having too much over representation or domination from one particular conference. A "yay, everybody wins" sort of deal... But hell, considering that the SEC would have had 4 BCS worthy teams (with 3 who would have made it) with two in the title game even if UGA had won, then that kind of throws that idea out the window....

 

Hopefully between this whole deal and the newfound superconferences, there should be more of a push than ever to do this the right way with a playoff... I really might stop watching non-UGA games if they continue this charade with a bunch of watered-down conferences.

Edited by delusions of granduer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those agianst a rematch, let me ask a question I probably already know the answer to... Would you still not be interested in that matchup if it was the result of a playoff?

 

I've long thought that the BCS was set up so to get as much regional interest as possible by not having too much over representation or domination from one particular conference. A "yay, everybody wins" sort of deal... But hell, considering that the SEC would have had 4 BCS worthy teams (with 3 who would have made it) with two in the title game even if UGA had won, then that kind of throws that idea out the window....

 

Hopefully between this whole deal and the newfound superconferences, there should be more of a push than ever to do this the right way with a playoff... I really might stop watching non-UGA games if they continue this charade with a bunch of watered-down conferences.

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those agianst a rematch, let me ask a question I probably already know the answer to... Would you still not be interested in that matchup if it was the result of a playoff?

 

I've long thought that the BCS was set up so to get as much regional interest as possible by not having too much over representation or domination from one particular conference. A "yay, everybody wins" sort of deal... But hell, considering that the SEC would have had 4 BCS worthy teams (with 3 who would have made it) with two in the title game even if UGA had won, then that kind of throws that idea out the window....

 

Hopefully between this whole deal and the newfound superconferences, there should be more of a push than ever to do this the right way with a playoff... I really might stop watching non-UGA games if they continue this charade with a bunch of watered-down conferences.

My only issue with a rematch is because we only get one game and there's nowhere near enough of a sample size to decide who deserves to play in it. A rematch as a result of a proper play-off? No problem at all with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why do the coaches get to vote? the whole thing is a joke and this is proof.

 

I already watched the LSU/Alabam game this year, we already know who the better team is, they won on the road. Now how is playing another game on a neautral site going to add any more clarity? If Alabama wins then they will be number one? like I said, it is a joke.

 

While I agree and I have almost zero interest in watching another LSU-Alabama snoozefest let's not forget that Bama missed 4 FG's in their game against LSU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While I agree and I have almost zero interest in watching another LSU-Alabama snoozefest let's not forget that Bama missed 4 FG's in their game against LSU.

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Bama people are using the Big Ten championship game as an example. Who is the Big ten champion? Michigan State had already beat Wisconsin and was forced to play them again. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bama people are using the Big Ten championship game as an example. Who is the Big ten champion? Michigan State had already beat Wisconsin and was forced to play them again. :wacko:

1) MSU won at home on the last play of the game and then lost on a neutral site. Bama lost in their own crib so does not deserve to back into a rematch.

2) Few outside of the Big 10 ultimately care about the Big 10 Champ

3) Those teams all spend 8 games each playing against one another, so we're not forced to pick two teams given almost zero comparable data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those teams all spend 8 games each playing against one another, so we're not forced to pick two teams given almost zero comparable data.

Again not crazy about Bama getting a 2nd chance just making a point. The above point stated is exactly why Bama was selected.

 

Especially considering that LSU is the first team that I know of to end the season with a perfect 1.0000 BCS rating.

 

1 LSU 13-0 1 2875 1.0000 1 1475 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000

 

Combined the fact that LSU & Bama each spent 8 games playing & dominating similar SEC caliber competition with the fact that it took LSU OT to beat Bama and there you get the reason why Alabama got the nod. LSU historic perfect rating certainly was a huge benefit to Bama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again not crazy about Bama getting a 2nd chance just making a point. The above point stated is exactly why Bama was selected.

 

Especially considering that LSU is the first team that I know of to end the season with a perfect 1.0000 BCS rating.

 

1 LSU 13-0 1 2875 1.0000 1 1475 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000

 

Combined the fact that LSU & Bama each spent 8 games playing & dominating similar SEC caliber competition with the fact that it took LSU OT to beat Bama and there you get the reason why Alabama got the nod. LSU historic perfect rating certainly was a huge benefit to Bama.

My point that you quoted should never be used a reason for choosing a rematch in the BCS Championship game.

 

There's over 100 D-1 teams. With very few exceptions, people play almost nobody out of their conference of any consequence. Kudos to LSU for certainly bucking that trend this year. But Bama really didn't. It's not their fault that PSU was not better, but them beating a 2nd tier Big 10 team does not mean much to me. Certainly OK St didn't do any better (they actually did worse), but this isn't an argument in favor of OK St as much as it is against Bama.

 

The point is, with so many teams and so small a sample size of credible OOC match-ups, why do we waste the one game we've decided will determine the champ on re-establishing what we've already seen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we all agree that that the BCS sucks balls and needs to be replaced?

 

The SEC has been pushing for this ever since an undefeated AU team got shut out of the BCS in 2004. If only there was an overwhelming SEC bias back then...

Edited by SEC=UGA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can we all agree that that the BCS sucks balls and needs to be replaced?

 

The SEC has been pushing for this ever since an undefeated AU team got shut out of the BCS in 2004. If only there was an overwhelming SEC bias back then...

 

 

Other problems about the BCS also get lost in the NC game hoopla. Watching TCU pretty much mercilessly (and without any real other option) having to run up the score on UNLV in the final game of the year to dash to a better than 16th ranking is another crappy by product of this system, but that doesn't get much play, when in fact putting teams into that situation is almost just as bad for the sport, and happens a lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Other problems about the BCS also get lost in the NC game hoopla. Watching TCU pretty much mercilessly (and without any real other option) having to run up the score on UNLV in the final game of the year to dash to a better than 16th ranking is another crappy by product of this system, but that doesn't get much play, when in fact putting teams into that situation is almost just as bad for the sport, and happens a lot more.

Or what Okie St did to poor OU. I mean, when the elephants war, the grass is trampled, and it breaks my heart to see poor little OU get used as a tool like that.

 

But, yes, I agree, just another lame element of the system. However, I don't see exactly how going to a 12 team play-off would fix, at least the scenario you mentioned. TCU would be in that situation trying to earn one of the top 12 spots which is basically the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is, with so many teams and so small a sample size of credible OOC match-ups, why do we waste the one game we've decided will determine the champ on re-establishing what we've already seen?

FWIW Colley's Bias Free Matrix Rankings agrees Oklahoma State should have been in the game. The only thing I can come up with is that in a one game type deal that people would rather see a re-match between two proven heavy weights than taking a chance on an up and coming contender. :wacko:

 

1. LSU

2. Oklahoma St

3. Alabama

4. Kansas St

5. Stanford

6. Oklahoma

7. Boise St

8. Oregon

9. USC

10. Michigan

 

http://www.colleyrankings.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FWIW Colley's Bias Free Matrix Rankings agrees Oklahoma State should have been in the game. The only thing I can come up with is that in a one game type deal that people would rather see a re-match between two proven heavy weights than taking a chance on an up and coming contender. :wacko:

Since when does the BCS have anything to do with what "people want to see". 1997? When it was upgrade from just entirely voting on the champ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FWIW Colley's Bias Free Matrix Rankings agrees Oklahoma State should have been in the game. The only thing I can come up with is that in a one game type deal that people would rather see a re-match between two proven heavy weights than taking a chance on an up and coming contender. :wacko:

 

1. LSU

2. Oklahoma St

3. Alabama

4. Kansas St

5. Stanford

6. Oklahoma

7. Boise St

8. Oregon

9. USC

10. Michigan

 

http://www.colleyrankings.com/

 

He uses maybe some of the better methodology.

 

I took a quick glance at the records of the Opponents for OSU, Bama & Stan. The winning % of the teams that these teams played are as follows

 

Stanford's Opponents - 48.63%

Bama's Opponents - 55.2239%

OSU's Opponents - 56.25%

 

This would have a tendency for the computers to give the edge to OSU despite them having lost to a 6-6 team. Kinda interesting.

 

Of course the computers will break it down further, the records of bama's opponent's, opponent's opponent's, opponent's, opponent... so that the comparison, theoretically becomes more and more clear as to the "actual" strength of the opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since when does the BCS have anything to do with what "people want to see". 1997? When it was upgrade from just entirely voting on the champ?

Believe it happenned after the year LSU beat Oklahoma for the 2003 BCS NC? Prior to that the computers played a larger role. Think it had something to do with the fact that the media darlings at that time USC were left out of the big game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Believe it happenned after the year LSU beat Oklahoma for the 2003 BCS NC? Prior to that the computers played a larger role. Think it had something to do with the fact that the media darlings at that time USC were left out of the big game.

I'm not talking about what band-aids they've done to try and shut people up for another year. I mean, actually giving the people what they want. Because I'm pretty sure the lion's share don't want the crap they're feeding us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.