Started By
Message
re: Saban: The selection committee shouldn't reward teams that play weaker schedules
Posted on 4/25/13 at 12:58 am to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
Posted on 4/25/13 at 12:58 am to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
Well, that sped up the process...but it was coming anyway.
Maybe, but I think it would have just eventually died down just like all the conference expansion is basically over now.
0
Posted on 4/25/13 at 12:59 am to jbond
quote:
Read: The SEC's on another level and not only should the SEC champion be guaranteed a spot, but 2nd best SEC team should get a bid too.
Are you saying this just in case Alabama doesn't win the SEC? We at LSU believe you should win your conference to be involved in NC talk. As a matter of fact, prior to 2012 Satan agreed with this.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:02 am to Bench McElroy
BUT IT'S A BRIDGE SCHEDULE FOR A BRIDGE SCHEDULE
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:08 am to shoelessjoe
quote:
We at LSU believe you should win your conference to be involved in NC talk.
Of course you do because it fit your argument and you did not want to play the only team you knew could beat you. Y'all don't give a crap about OK St other than it was an easier path. Saban did his job and fought for his school, same as miles in 2007. Besides the facts and rules or guidelines lie directly.in Bama's corner. There was no rule.about conference champions it was best one verses best two. Considering the outcome and completeness of one team as compared to the other it appears Bama belonged there but maybe OK St instead of LSU. Jabs aside Bama lost to the number one team in the nation by three and where they lost doesn't matter. Ok St lost to a 6-6 Iowa St team. If you Cantonese the difference I do t know what to tell you. Google sos for that year an tell me OK St schedule was that much more if any difficult than Bama's.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:11 am to labamafan
quote:
If you Cantonese the difference
Is this LesSpeak?
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:13 am to labamafan
Dude, you guys need to give that shut up. Nobody thinks that Okie St. Was the better team. We're just saying that you had your shot and lost it at home. Then your coach whined like a little bitch and UA got in on name recognition. You didn't earn and you know it.
This post was edited on 4/25/13 at 1:14 am
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:17 am to labamafan
quote:
This committee is going to screw the sec every chance it gets
Yea, I laugh everytime I see someone post about 3 SEC teams getting in. Vandy has a better shot of playing MSU in Atlanta for the SEC title. I would be willing to bet most years won't even have 2 SEC teams. Just another reason I have said conference championship should be required with only 4 teams.
I wish they would do a 12 team playoff. 8 CC's and 4 at-large. Top 4 CC's get a bye, so the regular season still has meaning, but so does winning your conference. Play first 2 rounds at higher seeds stadium. Most times the 4 at-large teams would get a home playoff game.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:20 am to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
Yes I speaka Dr engrish I just can't type it.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:22 am to labamafan
I have thought cc should be a requirement since 01 when Nebraska got in. Not like LSU had a dog in the fight back in.
And as I have said. I thought Bama was the better team, but OSU was the more deserving with only 2 teams involved.
And as I have said. I thought Bama was the better team, but OSU was the more deserving with only 2 teams involved.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:23 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Dude, you guys need to give that shut up. Nobody thinks that Okie St. Was the better team. We're just saying that you had your shot and lost it at home. Then your coach whined like a little bitch and UA got in on name recognition. You didn't earn and you know it.
Considering 2007, and miles addressing the media about your reasons for being in the champ game, and the total butt raping your best team ever took, and your inability to recognize the rules.we're followed makes.this one of the most stupid post in sec rant history.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:24 am to Tiger Live2
quote:
nd as I have said. I thought Bama was the better team, but OSU was the more deserving with only 2 teams involved.
Not with a loss to a 6-6 Iowa State team. No way
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:28 am to labamafan
They played and beat more bowl teams. Played and beat more top 25 teams. And won their conference(which the Big 12 isn't the Big East or ACC) yes they were. Saying otherwise is just being blinded by homerism
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:31 am to labamafan
LSU hadn't already lost to OSU AT HOME is my point. If LSU had lost out after beating UA then I would agree that y'all should have gone, but you had your shot at LSU and blew it, then got a redo. It's not like LSU got a rematch with OSU in 07.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:34 am to GeauxxxTigers23
All you had to was score 22 points. 
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:38 am to GeauxxxTigers23
No my point is the comparison of Miles.lobbying for LSU in 2007 with two regular season losses to mediocre team's and you seeing that as different than Saban lobbying for his team with one loss to the number one team at the time by three points a different. You can't be objective because you hate Bama or Saban or both. It makes it difficult to have Reasonable discussion. You act lol Saban should have stood up an said you know what even though we played a difficult schedule in a better conference go ahead and reward a team with the same record who didn't play in a conf champ game, and Sam as us and who lost to a bad Iowa St team who may not even go to a bowl. It's ludicrous.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:41 am to labamafan
I can't believe we are still debating this.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:45 am to Tiger Live2
By the way sos 2011, LSU one Bama two and OK St is at five. An my opinion is no more homerish than you wanting LSU to face a team with the same record, who didn't play in a conference champ game and the only discernable difference is the losses. It's not like Bama controlled the voting. The polls are.determined by a combination of hundreds of voters.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:48 am to labamafan
Well, I do hate Bama but not necessarily Saban. I was just talking shite because it's the internet. But I can have a reasonable discussion.
If you want to compare the lobbying for one's team then fine. I'm saying that LSU in 07 and UA in 12 aren't comparable at all because Bama had already lost to LSU 2 months prior. We shouldn't have had to play you again.
Anyways, back on topic, the playoff committee is stupid. If there absolutely has to be a playoff they should have kept the BCS rankings and just taken the top four for the playoff. It's easy for the polls to frick up the order of 1-4, but normally 1-4 are the top 4 teams.
If you want to compare the lobbying for one's team then fine. I'm saying that LSU in 07 and UA in 12 aren't comparable at all because Bama had already lost to LSU 2 months prior. We shouldn't have had to play you again.
Anyways, back on topic, the playoff committee is stupid. If there absolutely has to be a playoff they should have kept the BCS rankings and just taken the top four for the playoff. It's easy for the polls to frick up the order of 1-4, but normally 1-4 are the top 4 teams.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:50 am to labamafan
Please say who else in 07 was more deserving. The only teams from a power conference with less than 2 losses was Kansas and OSU. The Big East champ was primed to go but lost to Pitt. KU played just a horrible schedule. VT had 2 losses, but one was getting completely blasted by LSU. UGA did too, but they didn't even win the East. We got VERY lucky other teams shite the bed, but we were the most deserving in a VERY strange year for college football.
Posted on 4/25/13 at 1:54 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
they should have kept the BCS rankings
This year it would have been ND, UA, UF and Oregon...an Indie, 2 divisional runnerups, and 1 CC. There's going to be some butthurt for sure with selection committee. Who would they have chosen? #1 ND, #2 UA, #5 KSU and #6 Stanford?
Page 3 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News