Started By
Message
Irony of the BCS this year
Posted on 12/5/11 at 9:25 pm
Posted on 12/5/11 at 9:25 pm
BCS was created because of all the examples of top-rated teams not being able to play each other due to bowl affiliations. Remember multiple undefeated teams left the writers saying, "if only we could find a way to get these teams to play."
So, here we are, 14 years or whatever in, and a system designed to get the top teams together that wouldn't otherwise, has matched two teams that have already played each other. Pretty ironic.
So, here we are, 14 years or whatever in, and a system designed to get the top teams together that wouldn't otherwise, has matched two teams that have already played each other. Pretty ironic.
7
Posted on 12/5/11 at 9:26 pm to Big L
A plus one is all that's needed IMO
Let OK State beat someone and play the winner
Let OK State beat someone and play the winner
Posted on 12/5/11 at 9:44 pm to Big L
I hadn't thought about this but you are exactly right
Posted on 12/5/11 at 10:08 pm to Big L
quote:
So, here we are, 14 years or whatever in, and a system designed to get the top teams together that wouldn't otherwise, has matched two teams that have already played each other. Pretty ironic.
I watched SEC Storied on ESPNU earlier. It was centered around the move to a Conference Championship game. Kramer said that if Florida would have beaten Bama and kept them out of the Game with Miami that CFB would probably be alot different today.
So it's Antonio Langham's fault we have the BCS and conference realignment.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 10:21 pm to lsufan1971
quote:
I watched SEC Storied on ESPNU earlier. It was centered around the move to a Conference Championship game. Kramer said that if Florida would have beaten Bama and kept them out of the Game with Miami that CFB would probably be alot different today.
So it's Antonio Langham's fault we have the BCS and conference realignment.
I think the question would have continued to be asked without a playoff as there would have been continued examples of this. I really don't understand how they can't find a way to make the bowl games playoffs. The ONLY reason I can see for not wanting a "bowl games as playoffs" is because they are neutral site games and it would require some fan bases and players' families to spend a lot of money on travel and tickets. For the record I'm in favor of pre-bowl home/away playoffs with 8 teams. Play them immediately after the last week of the season and seed them and give home field to seeds 1-4. Then you put four winning teams in two BCS bowls, four losing teams in two BCS bowls, and then the BCS championship game would be the winner of the two games between the winners.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 10:31 pm to Big L
quote:
I think the question would have continued to be asked without a playoff as there would have been continued examples of this. I really don't understand how they can't find a way to make the bowl games playoffs. The ONLY reason I can see for not wanting a "bowl games as playoffs" is because they are neutral site games and it would require some fan bases and players' families to spend a lot of money on travel and tickets. For the record I'm in favor of pre-bowl home/away playoffs with 8 teams. Play them immediately after the last week of the season and seed them and give home field to seeds 1-4. Then you put four winning teams in two BCS bowls, four losing teams in two BCS bowls, and then the BCS championship game would be the winner of the two games between the winners.
From everything I have read the Rose Bowl is the fly in the ointment along with the thought of the NCAA "sanctioning" the playoff. The bowls and conferences do not want to lose the TV money.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 10:43 pm to Hubbhogg
"Let OK State beat someone and play the winner"
If it were a plus one, OK State would be playing Bama in a bowl game. Then it would be LSU/Bama in the plus one anyway.
In that system, there is no way in hell LSU and Bama would be playing each other first.
If it were a plus one, OK State would be playing Bama in a bowl game. Then it would be LSU/Bama in the plus one anyway.
In that system, there is no way in hell LSU and Bama would be playing each other first.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:00 pm to lsufan1971
quote:
From everything I have read the Rose Bowl is the fly in the ointment along with the thought of the NCAA "sanctioning" the playoff. The bowls and conferences do not want to lose the TV money.
Easy solution. Leave. The NCAA is the one that NEEDS the schools. The schools do not need the NCAA anymore.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:41 pm to BamaDude06
I agree. The NCAA, including the SEC, is corrupt. Let’s start with the easy observations: the SEC is located in Bama; the SEC-CG is located in the East every year; an abundance of SEC game officials have ties to Alabama (heck, they live there). I don’t have the time to lay out my solution.
The Sugar Bowl is in New Orleans. So exactly how does that every four-year-anomaly square with the SEC game in the Georgia Dome every year? It does not. How about something really fair: SEC-CG outside of the SEC? How about other SEC teams getting a shot every four years to defeat LSU in the Dome? No, all that would be more fair.
Losers talk about playoffs. What in the heck is the regular season for? We beat BAMA at home, crushed GA at home, and crushed all the other elite SEC teams. But no, BAMA must have a second chance?
We have a playoff system. But losers and wannabee teams and conferences just refuse to accept it. They want a chance they don’t deserve. In life, you usually do not get second chances when opportunity comes knocking at your door. Oh yeah, Company X was driven into the ground by Company Y, so others must take Company Y and build them up for another shot?
BAMA lost the first game, and they are going to lose the second game. LSU is the complete team, and BAMA ain’t. So BAMA but not OKST gets the bailout.
Sure we could tweak the system, but it would be exclusive, and in liberal society, that is forbidden. The “little guy” with his union brutes must be given a second chance.
The Sugar Bowl is in New Orleans. So exactly how does that every four-year-anomaly square with the SEC game in the Georgia Dome every year? It does not. How about something really fair: SEC-CG outside of the SEC? How about other SEC teams getting a shot every four years to defeat LSU in the Dome? No, all that would be more fair.
Losers talk about playoffs. What in the heck is the regular season for? We beat BAMA at home, crushed GA at home, and crushed all the other elite SEC teams. But no, BAMA must have a second chance?
We have a playoff system. But losers and wannabee teams and conferences just refuse to accept it. They want a chance they don’t deserve. In life, you usually do not get second chances when opportunity comes knocking at your door. Oh yeah, Company X was driven into the ground by Company Y, so others must take Company Y and build them up for another shot?
BAMA lost the first game, and they are going to lose the second game. LSU is the complete team, and BAMA ain’t. So BAMA but not OKST gets the bailout.
Sure we could tweak the system, but it would be exclusive, and in liberal society, that is forbidden. The “little guy” with his union brutes must be given a second chance.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:45 pm to TigerPaul2
U seem mad 
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:46 pm to TigerPaul2
quote:Is that why LSU only gained 12 yards of offense and ZERO first downs in first half of the SECCG agaisnt an UGA defense that's not as good as Alabama's?
LSU is the complete team, and BAMA ain’t.
This post was edited on 12/5/11 at 11:47 pm
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:49 pm to Hubbhogg
quote:
A plus one is all that's needed IMO
Let OK State beat someone and play the winner
bull shite. LSU should get the easier 1st game and play the winner of Alabama-OSU
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:49 pm to Big L
quote:
So, here we are, 14 years or whatever in, and a system designed to get the top teams together that wouldn't otherwise, has matched two teams that have already played each other. Pretty ironic.
Interesting. What I thought was ironic was that the goal of the BCS was to ensure that the top two teams were selected to play in the NC. The BCS achieves this goal and it is a failure, BCS chaos? How dare the BCS select the two best teams as the two top teams at the end of the season. That's not fair.
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:49 pm to ketchupmoney
quote:
Is that why LSU only gained 12 yards of offense and ZERO first downs in first half of the SECCG agaisnt an UGA defense that's not as good as Alabama's?
yet scored 42 points
It is the same team that beat Bama on the road though
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:51 pm to ketchupmoney
quote:
ketchupmoney
GTFO of here and get back to that mess of a thread that you started earlier
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:53 pm to ketchupmoney
quote:
Is that why LSU only gained 12 yards of offense and ZERO first downs in first half of the SECCG agaisnt an UGA defense that's not as good as Alabama's?
Yep. We had one part of our game do terribly, and we still squeaked out a 4.5 TD win. You guys have one kicker derail your perfect season, at home.
How does it feel to wake up every morning and think "We had to 'dominate' LSU on the field just to be able to lose by only 3?"
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:54 pm to TotalYatMove
quote:
How does it feel to wake up every morning and think "We had to 'dominate' LSU on the field just to be able to lose by only 3?"
easier after Sunday night?
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:56 pm to Big L
quote:
BCS was created because of all the examples of top-rated teams not being able to play each other due to bowl affiliations.
exactly right
a rematch doesn't really fall into the category of what the BCS was trying to accomplish. It was really the outcry from years like 94 and 97 that the BCS was supposed to mollify
Posted on 12/5/11 at 11:58 pm to TigerPaul2
quote:
LSU is the complete team, and BAMA ain’t. So BAMA but not OKST gets the bailout.
If y'all would have crushed us the way y'all did to everyone else or if OSU would have not lost to ISU, OSU would be in the NCG. Face it, we are a complete team and the ONLY team that can play for 4 quarters against LSU. That's why we are in this game because we are one of the best 2 teams. If OSU played LSU, the NCG would be a blowout and you know it.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 12:00 am to rolltide1283
FWIW I don't think either LSU or Alabama is really a complete team
both have average or below average passing games depending on the day. Both have roughly one WR that puts fear into opponents. And Alabama's special teams are average at best, probably below average
Both are outstanding teams and maybe LSU will end up comparing to some of the best teams in college football history... but neither one is truly complete as in lacking flaws
both have average or below average passing games depending on the day. Both have roughly one WR that puts fear into opponents. And Alabama's special teams are average at best, probably below average
Both are outstanding teams and maybe LSU will end up comparing to some of the best teams in college football history... but neither one is truly complete as in lacking flaws
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News