Started By
Message
re: Herbstreit was on Finebaum yesterday...
Posted on 10/16/09 at 9:28 am to old man tiger
Posted on 10/16/09 at 9:28 am to old man tiger
The poll voters wouldn't let it happen.
1
Posted on 10/16/09 at 9:31 am to ever43
Well Kirk seems to think that it is possible with the way the BCS comes up with the rankings now...even in 2003 Oklahoma lost their conference title game as the Number 1 team and still played for the title...
Posted on 10/16/09 at 9:53 am to LouisianaLonghorn
UF is almost a given in the SEC game ...
Bama, not so much.
Bama, not so much.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 9:56 am to Aubie83
quote:Haven't the formulas been tweaked since then?
even in 2003 Oklahoma lost their conference title game as the Number 1 team and still played for the title
Barring a major collapse by the other big name teams (Texas, Va Tech, USC) I don't see the voters ranking the loser of the SECCG high enough to put them in the game. I don't see the loser of the SECCG getting enough votes to stay ahead of a one loss USC or one loss VT with those losses coming early in the year.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 10:16 am to PJinAtl
quote:
Bama, not so much.
Barring a major meltdown...Bama is a given as well...no one in the entire conference is playing as well as Bama...wow...can't believe I just said that...
Posted on 10/16/09 at 10:19 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
In any case is is a ridiculous idea. Number 1, you have your chance to prove who is best at a neutral site called the SECCG. Number 2, what if the loser of the SECCG rematches and wins in the BCSCG? What has been proven? Nothing. Who is number 1? No one. You would end up saying one team was better at the end of the regular season and the other was better in bowl season.
It is a dumb idea.
+1. YOu're pretty smart until you go off on one of your Saban rants
Posted on 10/16/09 at 4:47 pm to CrimsonTusk
quote:
I hope not. There really is no reason. All the chips are down in SECCG whoever wins that should be presumed the better team. I am not saying Alabama will play in the game, but if we do and are undefeated and same with Florida I say lose goes to the Sugar bowl.
I agree. I was against Michigan and OSU in 2006 when Michigan fans up here in Detroit were clamoring for a rematch.
You get your shot, you either get it done or you get folded up.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 4:53 pm to AUriptide
quote:
I would rather see Cincy or Boise get in to bust up this horse shite system.
what a title game that would be
Posted on 10/16/09 at 4:55 pm to Bwana Whiskey
quote:
if bama somehow is able to beat UF in the SECCG, i would not want to play them again.
i would want an easy win, like against the buckeyes in the NCG.
Careful what you wish for..
Utah.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 4:57 pm to Aubie83
It wouldn't be right to have a rematch between two teams that just played a few weeks before. You're essentially giving the loser a second shot.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 5:15 pm to Aubie83
Should be but unlikely unless OU beats Texas and USC loses again.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 5:20 pm to old man tiger
wouldnt happen and dont want to play them twicw if we could manage to beat them.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 5:24 pm to Aubie83
The only way it would happen is if Oklahoma wins this weekend then runs the table to leave Texas out of the Big 12 championship. VT would also have to run the table and win the ACC. Cincinnati would also have to lose at least once. The only way a Bama-UF rematch could ever happen is if Bama wins the SECCG 28-27 on a last second FG/TD and the only two legitimate BCSCG options would be a Bama-VT rematch and a Bama-UF rematch. A lot of things have to happen, including Bama and UF both running the table in addition to everything else I listed.
Posted on 10/16/09 at 5:31 pm to rbiggarjr
quote:
Oaklahoma
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News