Started By
Message
re: Kevin Scarbinsky should have his barner card revoked
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:46 pm to tiger chaser
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:46 pm to tiger chaser
quote:
YOU JUST DONT' DESERVE ANOTHER CHANCE
1. There's only one BCS CG. Cumulative play over the season determines who goes there. Not one game.
2. If all other BCS teams have one loss, Bama is certainly deserving, having crushed all their competition they won against and taking the #1 team to OT, while all other teams have a horrible, HORRIBLE loss.
3.
Embrace the fear, accepting it, is the first step to overcoming it. 
0
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:46 pm to Alahunter
you guys are crazy.....and wont matter when Bamma loses to AU and LSU loses the SECCG to Georgia anyway.*
was very hard to type that with a straight face btw :P
was very hard to type that with a straight face btw :P
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:46 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
the BCS has declined to make winning a conference title a requirement for playing in the national title game. Why hold 2007 Georgia to a standard that doesn't exist?
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:47 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Kevin Scarbinsky should have his barner card revoked
Correct. Lsu has half a title from 2003.
Y'all have already clinched the 2011 Moral Victory National Championship, (MVNC). To just run up the score like this is quite unbecoming. What would Paul Bryant say?
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:47 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Correct. Lsu has half a title from 2003.
I don't think you comprehend the difference between two titles and a split title. We didn't split anything. LSU was the only BCS Champion in 03.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:49 pm to Revelator
Correct. However, by yalls admissions, the BCS shouldn't be about the best 2 teams playing for the title. This debases the authenticity of it as a crowned NC. The AP is actually a more legit NC under these circumstances. In essence, it was and will continue to be a split title, and the arguments yall are making further endorses the legitimacy of the AP and the weakening of the BCS. I mean shoot, it's already been revamped since the 2004 season, which goes to show how flawed it is in it's premise anyhow.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:50 pm to Revelator
I want Bama again, period. In the Dome, in NOLA and I think we are a better football team. I don't see what is so difficult to see here. I mean LSU vs. Okie State really does it for you? LSU - Bama in New Orleans for the whole damn thing and we went to their place and beat them already!
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:51 pm to RollTide1987
Excellent article. I believe with every word he said. 
The first time in recent memory I've liked Scarbinsky article. The sky is falling.
The first time in recent memory I've liked Scarbinsky article. The sky is falling.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 1:58 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Correct. However, by yalls admissions, the BCS shouldn't be about the best 2 teams playing for the title. This debases the authenticity of it as a crowned NC. The AP is actually a more legit NC under these circumstances. In essence, it was and will continue to be a split title, and
the arguments yall are making further
endorses the legitimacy of the AP and the weakening of the BCS. I mean shoot, it's already been revamped since the 2004 season, which goes to show how flawed it is in it's premise anyhow.
It's ironic that you would go to such lengths
to discredit a BCS National championship but yet claim multiple championships in a era where there was no limited scholarships so the best teams could hoard players, there was no matching of the best teams for a
championship, and teams were awarded championships before they lost their final games in bowls. Those championships were
more o a beauty contest than an indicator of a teams accomplishments on the field. That is rich!
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:00 pm to Algerian
quote:
I want Bama again, period. In the Dome, in NOLA and I think we are a better football team. I don't see what is so difficult to see here. I mean LSU vs. Okie State really does it for you? LSU - Bama in New Orleans for the whole damn thing and we went to their place and beat them already!
So Bama over Okie St.? What would it prove if Bama beat us in the dome except we are two evenly matched teams. Each with one lost to the other.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:01 pm to Revelator
quote:
So Bama over Okie St.? What would it prove if Bama beat us in the dome except we are two evenly matched teams. Each with one lost to the other
But!
My trophy is BIGGER than yours!!
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:09 pm to RollTideRockStar
quote:
My trophy is BIGGER than yours
Cool whatever. I'm not In the least fearful to play Bama again if that is how it shakes out. I thought LSU was a better team before we played you guys and nothing has changed my mind about that since. There are still games to be played before then however.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:37 pm to RollTide1987
Why do you care what Scarbinsky writes and why did this require a thread?
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:39 pm to RollTideRockStar
quote:
1/2 title 2003
Luck title 2007
is this year gonna be a luck title too?
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:40 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
If it comes down to Alabama or Oregon, you should give the nod to the Ducks because they lost to LSU on a neutral field.
Ha.
it should be because Oregon or OU won their conference, while Alabama will not even win their division.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:41 pm to plazadweller
quote:
Why do you care what Scarbinsky writes and why did this require a thread?
Because forums were invented for discussion and Scarbinsky has written an article worthy of discussion. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp.
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News