Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/17/11 at 10:50 pm to AUTigLN11
Didnt read the thread, my bad. Idgaf that much honestly 
Posted on 1/17/11 at 10:53 pm to Swagga
Basically it's not that anyone else was necessarily more "deserving" than LSU. It's the absurdity of the BCS that just arbitrarily chooses the participants of it's "championship" game. I have a huge problem with the logic of having several teams with the same record and using bias opinions and for God's sakes computers to just throw a team in there and trying to pass it off as a championship. If you lose two games, especially to average teams, it's pretty hard to argue you have some inherent right to be in the game.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 10:54 pm to Moustache
1(a)
UF
LSU
BAMA
1(b)
AU
TENN
2
UGA
ARKY
3
SC
UK
MSU
UM
Unrated- Vandy
UF
LSU
BAMA
1(b)
AU
TENN
2
UGA
ARKY
3
SC
UK
MSU
UM
Unrated- Vandy
Posted on 1/17/11 at 10:56 pm to buckfama8
quote:
buckfama
Your rankings have NOTHING to do with any objective standard that could be applied.
This post was edited on 1/17/11 at 10:58 pm
Posted on 1/17/11 at 10:56 pm to AUTigLN11
quote:
it's pretty hard to argue you have some inherent right to be in the game.
I agree, but everyone else was basically in the same position and LSU had played a pretty tough schedule. That was the perfect year for a playoff, wish it could have happened.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 10:57 pm to Buck Sweep
quote:
I see you set out to placate the masses here by putting the "barely" qualifier next to Auburn's 1st tier ranking
I did it only because the other #1's had two NC's and thats it, but AU definitely in tier 1 and overall #3 during that time period. I used barely for lack of a better word at the time.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:00 pm to Buck Sweep
False...refer back to original topic. I also factored in 'prestige'.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:02 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Ok.
BTW, if you add the 21 wins in that bammer vacated, they're still tied with UT for 5th in the SEC in terms of wins for that period of time.
BTW, if you add the 21 wins in that bammer vacated, they're still tied with UT for 5th in the SEC in terms of wins for that period of time.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:05 pm to buckfama8
As I said, "no objective standard", and that's not one of the criteria the OP set out
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:05 pm to Swagga
quote:
That was the perfect year for a playoff, wish it could have happened.
If only.
quote:
but everyone else was basically in the same position and LSU had played a pretty tough schedule
Kind of like AU playing more 9 win top 15 teams than USC and OU combined and having fewer close calls in 04 but being left out? What's important changes from year to year depending on what fits certain people's agenda and in no way gives a true championship game. It's really a shame. We've missed some great games over the years.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:20 pm to Buck Sweep
Here's the objectivity:
National Titles:
2-UF
2-LSU
1-BAMA
1-AUBURN
1-TENN
0-Rest
I know you're hating I put Bama over AU but both had national titles and both had undefeated SEC seasons. And going back to the original post Bama has more fans, better facilities (for now). I don't like it either, but the point is to be OBJECTIVE (remember)!
National Titles:
2-UF
2-LSU
1-BAMA
1-AUBURN
1-TENN
0-Rest
I know you're hating I put Bama over AU but both had national titles and both had undefeated SEC seasons. And going back to the original post Bama has more fans, better facilities (for now). I don't like it either, but the point is to be OBJECTIVE (remember)!
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:28 pm to Buck Sweep
quote:
BTW, if you add the 21 wins in that bammer vacated, they're still tied with UT for 5th in the SEC in terms of wins for that period of time.
Considering what Alabama went through from 2000-2006, I think 89 wins on the field from 2000-10 is pretty damn good.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:28 pm to buckfama8
quote:
buckfama8
I know you're hating I actually read the first post, which said 2000-2010, and set out a few criteria which were, in fact, a bit subjective. Bama, even if you give them the 21 vacated wins is 5th in the SEC in wins during that time, has only one SECC, and has one BCS title. Auburn has 15 more wins, one more SECC, and a BCSC. You can only put bammer ahead for the stated time period if you simply ignore everything other than a great love for the crimson tide. TN hasn't won either and SEC title or BCS title during the stated years.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:31 pm to Buck Sweep
Good point, that was late 90's for TN...my bad. Trust me no love for Bama! 
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:32 pm to buckfama8
quote:
I know you're hating I put Bama over AU but both had national titles and both had undefeated SEC seasons. And going back to the original post Bama has more fans, better facilities (for now). I don't like it either, but the point is to be OBJECTIVE (remember)!
Go to my previous post with actual stats and you will see Bucks reasoning and has nothing to do with rivalry just numbers. Wins, SEC Titles and NC's 2000-2010.
You keep going further back its obvious bama is clear top. I did 40 yrs back and bama had 5 NC, 13 SEC ranked above all SEC in wins, but 2000-2010 just wasn't very good till Saban arrived. Even adding vacated wins they are 5th in wins.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:35 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Considering what Alabama went through from 2000-2006, I think 89 wins on the field from 2000-10 is pretty damn good.
I agree
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:37 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Considering what Alabama went through from 2000-2006, I think 89 wins on the field from 2000-10 is pretty damn good.
No argument here.
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:40 pm to buckfama8
Tier 1 is obviously just LSU and UF over this time period. They are both pretty solid up front also.
Does any SEC team have more than 110 wins over the last 11 seasons?
Does any SEC team have more than 110 wins over the last 11 seasons?
This post was edited on 1/17/11 at 11:54 pm
Posted on 1/17/11 at 11:44 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
Tier 1 is obviously just LSU and UF over this time period. They are both pretty solid up front also.
If you're breaking down a 12 team league in to 6 tiers, then you're correct I guess.
Page 10 of 11
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News