Started By
Message
re: TD BCS guru has spoken...
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:45 pm to chipd
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:45 pm to chipd
quote:
Not the way it is currently set up. The season is the playoff..and Bama had their chance.
The set-up is a crock of shite then.
Why should the #2 team be determined by who the #1 is? That's asinine. OU is going to play for a NC, not because they are a better team, but because they don't play in the SEC.
Again, LSU fans' whole "you blew it" argument apparently doesnt work for OU. They get to lose to an awful team and jump over better teams with better resumes.
2
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:50 pm to beaverfever
quote:
Oregon's shedule is dog shite.
Oregon's marquee games:
-@LSU
-@Stanford
-USC
-Arizona State
Arkansas' marquee games:
-@LSU
-@Alabama
-USCe
-Texas A&M
Those schedules look pretty darn equal to me. I think an argument could be made either way IMO, although being an SEC homer I'd probably give the edge to Arky.
But anyone that claims Arkansas' schedule is "head over heels" better than Oregon's is certainly living in la-la land.
This post was edited on 11/16/11 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:52 pm to ChemicalXen
quote:
The set-up is a crock of shite then. Why should the #2 team be determined by who the #1 is? That's asinine. OU is going to play for a NC, not because they are a better team, but because they don't play in the SEC. Again, LSU fans' whole "you blew it" argument apparently doesnt work for OU. They get to lose to an awful team and jump over better teams with better resumes.
I might agree with you. I was on record before the Bama game as being against a repeat. It is unfair to the winner of the first game. I will say..the only good thing about the current system is that regular season games matter. I mean who cares about regular season college Basketball?
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:52 pm to ChemicalXen
quote:
Again, LSU fans' whole "you blew it" argument apparently doesnt work for OU.
OU HASN'T PLAYED LSU.
How will we ever know if OU is better than LSU/Bama if they never get to play LSU/Bama? We already know LSU is better than Oregon and Alabama, there's no need to rehash that again in January, when there are other teams that might be better than LSU.
Again, this isn't about who is #2...this is about the best team in college football, and who is it? At this point, it's LSU. Until someone knocks LSU off, it will continue to be LSU. If 3 of the top5 already had their chance and couldn't get it done, what's the harm in letting the other 1/5 get their shot?
This post was edited on 11/16/11 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:54 pm to beaverfever
quote:
Ehhh that's Arkansas's worst computer poll. Absolutely no way arkansas would have a worse computer score.
Arkansas is ranked lower than Oregon in 5 of 6 computer polls.
Oregon has 3 games left on their schedule to Arkansas' 2 (unless by some freak accident they make the SECCG). Sure, Arkansas has a tougher opponent left that will help them gain some ground, but Oregon will be playing at least 2 opponents better than Mississippi State.
Arkansas can't catch up with Oregon if both win out.
This post was edited on 11/16/11 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:56 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
OU HASN'T PLAYED LSU.
I know. This does not qualify them as the 2nd best team in the country.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 1:56 pm to bpfergu
quote:Why? Who has Alabama beat? Why should Alabama get another shot at LSU before Oklahoma gets their first shot when they have the same number of losses and Oklahoma has better wins?
Alabama should absolutely get another shot before Oklahoma. You are comparing a team that lost to the #1 team in the nation vs a team that lost to one of the worst teams in the Big 12 at home.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:01 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:Exactly.
Again, this isn't about who is #2...this is about the best team in college football, and who is it? At this point, it's LSU. Until someone knocks LSU off, it will continue to be LSU. If 3 of the top5 already had their chance and couldn't get it done, what's the harm in letting the other 1/5 get their shot?
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:02 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
Again, this is not about who is #2
That's exactly what it's about. The sole purpose of the BCSNCG is to pit #1 vs. #2. just like the sole purpose of the SECCG is to crown the best team in the SEC; not determine who deserves to play in the BCSNCG.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:03 pm to beaverfever
quote:
lol im not bitching. I give arkansas a 20 percent chance tops of beating lsu. Just saying this guy isn't much of an expert if he really thinks a one loss oregon would have a higher computer ranking than arkansas. Oregon's shedule is dog shite.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:06 pm to ChemicalXen
I actually understand Bama and Oregon fans wanting/desiring their team to still have a chance at winning it all. It's natural. I'd feel the same way about LSU if we were in Oregon or Bama's position. It's a love and want for our school to win it all.
That said, you can't change history. Alabama and Oregon, for all practical purposes given the way things have played out, lost their shot at the title in their respective losses against LSU. At some point the fans of Oregon and Alabama will have to come to grips with that reality. All you had to do was win, and you'd be sitting pretty. But neither team did, and that's something that can't be undone.
As long as LSU is in the title game, Bama and Oregon will not be. And there's nothing unfair about that. All either team had to do was beat LSU, and there's no one to blame but themselves.
That said, you can't change history. Alabama and Oregon, for all practical purposes given the way things have played out, lost their shot at the title in their respective losses against LSU. At some point the fans of Oregon and Alabama will have to come to grips with that reality. All you had to do was win, and you'd be sitting pretty. But neither team did, and that's something that can't be undone.
As long as LSU is in the title game, Bama and Oregon will not be. And there's nothing unfair about that. All either team had to do was beat LSU, and there's no one to blame but themselves.
This post was edited on 11/16/11 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:06 pm to ChemicalXen
quote:No. The purpose of the BCSncg is to crown the best team in college football. We already know that LSU is better than Alabama and Oregon based on the games that have already been played. Therefore, if oklahoma wins out, they deserve to get their shot to prove they are the best team.
The sole purpose of the BCSNCG is to pit #1 vs. #2. just like the sole purpose of the SECCG is to crown the best team in the SEC;
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:08 pm to dreaux
quote:
Not exactly. What about the whole body of work? The whole deal with why people are in favor of a bowl game is because the whole season matters, in which case Alabama failed at their own house after a bye.
I'M the one actually showing the importance of the "body of work". You and others have this arrogant view that it's all about LSU and how such and such team did against the #1 team. In essence, the argument is that losing to the #1 team by a field goal in OT is much worse than losing to an unranked team at home. Not only is Alabama's relative lack of quality wins compared to Oklahoma being held against it but even it's loss is considered worse than Oklahoma's based on the idea that losing to the #1 LSU is worse because Oklahoma's loss wasn't to LSU. It's just really, really, really bizarre logic being used.
quote:
Even if there was a playoff, if you don't win you're division, you are eliminated. Even if you get a wildcard, you would still have to play a higher seed, without a bye and possibly away from home.
Now you're simply making up hypothetical rules that don't even currently apply. 2 teams that didn't win their conference and 1 that didn't even win its own division have played in the BCS title game. No specific rule against a non-conference champ is even in place. You realize you are basically saying that Alabama at #3 wouldn't qualify for an 8 team playoff because we didn't win our division? Do you understand how completely idiotic that it? That's why any playoff that ONLY includes BCS conference champions will NEVER....EVER be approved. It has to allow for 2 or 3 at large bids for teams that don't win their conference.
quote:
Under you're stupid scenario, not only did we beat you, but we have to play in the seccg, without a bye, in Georgia while bama stays home? And, If we get by that you get another shot?
That "stupid scenario" is completely valid because there still isn't a rule excluding teams that didn't win their conference. Some are essentially suggesting that Georgia would deserve to be in the BCS national title game over LSU if they win the SEC Championship game which is absolutely absurd.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:11 pm to ChemicalXen
quote:
That's exactly what it's about. The sole purpose of the BCSNCG is to pit #1 vs. #2. just like the sole purpose of the SECCG is to crown the best team in the SEC; not determine who deserves to play in the BCSNCG.
No...the purpose of the championship game is to figure out who is #1. By your logic..the it should be Bama and LSU in the SECCG, but it is not. Also by your logic, the loser of the BCSNCGshould be #2 in the final poll...but that is not usually how it goes
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:12 pm to Govt Tide
quote:
there still isn't a rule excluding teams that didn't win their conference.
The rule is pretty much an unwritten rule barring some chaotic circumstances that can't avoid it.
And it's a pretty good unwritten rule. Any reasonable person would agree that a team that can't win its own conference doesn't deserve a chance to win the whole enchilada.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:13 pm to chipd
quote:
Also by your logic, the loser of the BCSNCGshould be #2 in the final poll...but that is not usually how it goes
the final BCS poll is prior to the championship game, it's the one that determines who plays
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:17 pm to OneMoreTime
quote:
No. The purpose of the BCSncg is to crown the best team in college football.
No it's not. The BCSNCG is a 1-game playoff system that was made as an alternative to the bowl system. Before the BCS, #1 & #2 did not have to play each other at the end of the year. There is nothing in the BCS rules that say the 2 best teams will play in the game except when those 2 teams have already played one another.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:18 pm to chipd
quote:
No...the purpose of the championship game is to figure out who is #1. By your logic..the it should be Bama and LSU in the SECCG, but it is not. Also by your logic, the loser of the BCSNCGshould be #2 in the final poll...but that is not usually how it goes
Yes the purpose of THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME itself is to figure out who #1 is but the purpose of choosing the participants is to find out who #1 AND #2 is. I don't understand why this isn't being grasped. And #2 isn't based only on what they did or didn't do against the current #1 team. That concept is so silly I'm embarrassed for LSU fans that are actually rationalizing their positions against Alabama and Oregon being in the title game by using it. According to that line of thinking = Oklahoma is the default #2 because they haven't played and lost to #1 LSU unlike Alabama and Oregon. Nevermind that home loss to a team with a losing record. Alabama and Oregon's loss was worse.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:20 pm to baytiger
quote:
the final BCS poll is prior to the championship game, it's the one that determines who plays
True, but at the end of the year last year..TCU moved ahead of Oregon in end of season polls.
Posted on 11/16/11 at 2:21 pm to Govt Tide
LSU beat Alabama.
LSU beat Oregon.
And you think LSU fans are being irrational because we feel someone other than Alabama or Oregon should play in the BCSCG?
That's funny stuff right there.
LSU beat Oregon.
And you think LSU fans are being irrational because we feel someone other than Alabama or Oregon should play in the BCSCG?
That's funny stuff right there.
Page 7 of 14
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News