Started By
Message
re: Bama's Sense of Entitlement is Well Known...
Posted on 1/7/12 at 9:58 pm to hybrid3
Posted on 1/7/12 at 9:58 pm to hybrid3
Hybrid, you are correct, but here is the rub... Alabama was ranked 2nd in both the AP and UPI behind Penn State. USC was 3rd going into the bowls. Bama beats #1 by 7 in the Sugar and USC beats #5 Michigan by 7. Inexplicably, the coaches (UPI) jump USC over Bama after having Bama ahead of them before. Bama beat their #1 and got the AP which was widely considered the more legitimate poll.
Arguing 1978 is not a legitimate title is beyond stupid. They were the AP champions after beating #1 as a #2. It was the same situation the BCS seeks to have now. Surely you dont think schools should only acknowledge unanimous poll titles. Do you count 2003 for LSU?
Arguing 1978 is not a legitimate title is beyond stupid. They were the AP champions after beating #1 as a #2. It was the same situation the BCS seeks to have now. Surely you dont think schools should only acknowledge unanimous poll titles. Do you count 2003 for LSU?
1
Posted on 1/7/12 at 10:04 pm to Bwbama
quote:
Arguing 1978 is not a legitimate title is beyond stupid. They were the AP champions after beating #1 as a #2. It was the same situation the BCS seeks to have now. Surely you dont think schools should only acknowledge unanimous poll titles. Do you count 2003 for LSU?
See my earlier post.
No problem with the AP '78 going to bama, or the UPI '78 going to USC.
IMO, since the inception of the BCS, that is the only one that counts.
Like 2003.
But, bammers luvvv to point out that LSU "had to share the '03 title with USC" but their collective mind has been lost with the thought that LSU or Ok St could get the AP title this year.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News