re: Post rematch opinion

quote:

---

Anyone who truly believed that was an idiot. When you have two equally matched teams in a rematch, the loser of the first game absolutely has the advantage ... especially when they've heard for 5 weeks that they do not belong there. As much as I wanted to see LSU leave no doubt as to who the better team was, my gut told me it was going to be a long night. I really hate it when I'm right.

---

The game would still have been much different if Les had a QB that properly run an option play and throw the ball past the LOS.

quote:

---

Anyone who truly believed that was an idiot. When you have two equally matched teams in a rematch, the loser of the first game absolutely has the advantage ... especially when they've heard for 5 weeks that they do not belong there. As much as I wanted to see LSU leave no doubt as to who the better team was, my gut told me it was going to be a long night. I really hate it when I'm right.

---

very true


I do think that if it was 4 teams and 2 SEC teams won the semi's, then a rematch mental advantage wouldn't be as strong.

If Bama had to beat Okie State to make the final, I think LSU players mentally would have said ok, they won to get here so they are deserving

but then you get into another issue if it's four. The national media will scream to the heavens that the "rematch" has to occur before the final, meaning in the semi-final round....which is a total crock of shite IMO

if anything the teams from the same conference should be seperated as far as possible but if a plus one comes into effect, you could see SEC rematches in the semi's every fricking year which would suck beyond belief

What does 'the best team' mean? Alabama obviously wasn't the best team, they lost to LSU. LSU obviously wasn't, they lost to Alabama. OK St and Stanford both lost, so they couldn't be the best.

Is it the best on the one day that they play? Because that argument doesn't work when you play twice. Is it the best over the whole season? Because then the championship game is pointless unless two teams have similar resumes. No teams could touch LSU's resume this last year. There is nothing at all that indicates to me that Alabama should have been in that game. Nothing at all indicates that Stanford or OK St should have either. I'm not saying that LSU should have played themselves (I wonder if JJ would start both ways, hah), but there wasn't another team that deserved to be there. It's a totally different discussion if LSU had lost to, say, Florida mid-year but still won out through the SEC champ game. Since LSU deserved to be in the game and no other team distinguished itself as deserving to be in, I view the game as an exhibition, especially if it's Bama in there. LSU already won that game, won the division, won the conference. Since they played Bama, the rematch was meaningless, so LSU effectively won the national title the moment Bama was selected.

LSU had nothing left to prove. I don't care what the voters say - if any service in the entire world says LSU is the champion, I'll point there and claim it. That's the way the sport has worked for over a hundred years. If I have to look to the Football Thesaurus published in 2049 to do so, I'll proudly do so the moment it comes out

quote:

---

If Bama had to beat Okie State to make the final, I think LSU players mentally would have said ok, they won to get here so they are deserving

---

I just have to keep agreeing with you on the mental weakness of this team and its lack of heart. I feel really sorry for these young men when life shows up and mentally they feel that its unfair so they just quit and don't show up like the BCSCG.

These are all good points you have made that LSU and Less have not prepared these young men to be fighters in football or life.

quote:

---

When is the last time the best team wasn't bcs champ?

This year. Bama did not win their division nor the conference championship. They did not deserve to be in the NC game

---

This entire argument hinges on what the BCS NC game is supposed to be.

IF you take the side that the regular season represents the 'playoff' then Alabama didn't deserve to be there. The regular season 'playoff' had settled that issue. This stance does not care who the 'best' team is at the end of the year - it only rewards the team that survived the 'playoffs.'

IF you take the side that the the BCS system is supposed to find the 'best team' then the regular season results don't matter so much regarding head-to-head play. If other factors play out - such as other teams with similar records lose at inopportune times, then whole body of work of all teams ought to be eligible to get them into the game.

In my view, I want the BCS to find the BEST TEAM. So I do not object to the way this played out. Other teams lost when they shouldn't have to inferior opponents. Bama only lost to the 'best team in the nation' (at that time) - any other team would have also lost to LSU with that theory.

Now comes the BCS and we admit - the first game was very close - LSU came out ahead in OT - Saban got out coached - Bama got unlucky. So lets play one more game to see who is REALLY the best.

As far as I am concerned, the better team won. LSU is the second best team in the nation.

We could have been first - but Miles got outcoached - we got our asses handed to us.

End of 2011 - let's whip some bama arse in 2012!!!!!!!!

quote:

---

Miles got outcoached - we got our asses handed to us.

---

Nice summary of your post.

Let me break it down in terms all of us can identify with. You remember when you were a teenager and there was that girl you wanted to frick so badly? Well we fricked her on 11/5/11. Getting the pussy the second time on 1/9/12 just wasn't as exciting for the boys and they got beat because of it. Simple as that.

So who should have been there? Okie lite? No conference championship game anymore and they lose to what ended up being a 6-6 team in IA State. No losses are good but which is better? A loss in OT to the then #1 team or a loss to a 6-6 team? What year was it again that LSU had 2 OT losses yet played for the NC? Y'all didn't scream about that but you are now because a 1 loss team played for the NC or is it because it's Bama? The best 2 teams in the nation played on 1/9 and that's what the BCS is set up for.

quote:

---

Getting the pussy the second time on 1/9/12 just wasn't as exciting for the boys and they got beat because of it.

---

So, on 1/9 your boys turned gay and got arse-pounded? Very interesting metaphor.

quote:

---

Is it the best on the one day that they play? Because that argument doesn't work when you play twice. Is it the best over the whole season? Because then the championship game is pointless unless two teams have similar resumes. No teams could touch LSU's resume this last year. There is nothing at all that indicates to me that Alabama should have been in that game. Nothing at all indicates that Stanford or OK St should have either. I'm not saying that LSU should have played themselves (I wonder if JJ would start both ways, hah), but there wasn't another team that deserved to be there. It's a totally different discussion if LSU had lost to, say, Florida mid-year but still won out through the SEC champ game. Since LSU deserved to be in the game and no other team distinguished itself as deserving to be in, I view the game as an exhibition, especially if it's Bama in there. LSU already won that game, won the division, won the conference. Since they played Bama, the rematch was meaningless, so LSU effectively won the national title the moment Bama was selected.

LSU had nothing left to prove. I don't care what the voters say - if any service in the entire world says LSU is the champion, I'll point there and claim it. That's the way the sport has worked for over a hundred years. If I have to look to the Football Thesaurus published in 2049 to do so, I'll proudly do so the moment it comes o

---

You are very delusional...