Started By
Message
re: USC not LSU real nation champion for 03-04 season?
Posted on 7/17/08 at 10:11 am to GoBigOrange86
Posted on 7/17/08 at 10:11 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:
Alot of good their SOS did in the Sugar Bowl
That makes me wonder...did you even watch the Sugar Bowl?
Oklahoma, down 21-14 on their final drive, made it deep within LSU territory. They didn't capitalize and LSU won. But they were driving on the Tigers; LSU just made the bigger play. In fact, Mark Clayton was in the endzone clutching the ball tightly on their last 3rd down attempt; if one of the DBs (can't remember who, I think it was Webster though) doesn't break up a surefire pass, the game probably goes to overtime and since OT in college football is basically an offensive shootout, I wouldn't be surprised to see Oklahoma "split" the title.
Don't act like Oklahoma couldn't handle the pressure of coming back or of dealing with adversity -- they choked against Kansas State and they were intent on not doing so again. In my mind, Oklahoma didn't lose the game; LSU won it.
1
Posted on 7/17/08 at 12:28 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
USC not LSU real nation champion for 03-04 season?
quote:
What if USC had been required to beat the PAC 10 runner-up twice?
What if LSU had to play every team in the SEC?
Tangerine,
LSU played 9 conference games, the same number as USC - including having to beat #5 Georgia for the second time in 9 games IN ATLANTA, to win the SEC Championship.
Explain to me how LSU could play 11 conference games ???
Posted on 7/17/08 at 12:31 pm to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
USC not LSU real nation champion for 03-04 season?
I think LSU and USC were the two best teams in college football in '03. It would be silly to say one or the other would have won the BCSCG if they'd played, and each set of fans is biased towards it's own team.
I do believe USC was better than Oklahoma, and we'd have had a fighting man's chance to beat LSU, even in New Orleans.
Oh, and we were undefeated in regulation.
lowerbama,
~~Sigh~~ Why can't all Trojan fans have your point of view? (and all Tiger fans for that matter :)
Posted on 7/17/08 at 12:36 pm to MetryTyger
quote:
Explain to me how LSU could play 11 conference games ???
Never said they could. Explain to me how the PAC-10 could have a conference championship game? They can't.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 12:43 pm to lsutothetop
quote:
That makes me wonder...did you even watch the Sugar Bowl?
Yeah. I seem to remember Oklahoma losing. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, well...you know.
I'm not denying they were good. But they clearly showed on back-to-back occasions that they were not the best team in the country.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 12:47 pm to LSUTANGERINE
The PAC-10 is about as good as you can get with a non-championship game conference considering the round robin. At least everyone plays everyone else.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 12:58 pm to GoBigOrange86
quote:
The PAC-10 is about as good as you can get with a non-championship game conference considering the round robin.
It is a actually better than a super conference where there is a CG, but everyone does not play each other. You could have a 6-6 or 7-5(pre C CG) East Champ who lost to the 12-0 (pre C CG) West Champ by 28 points in the regular season be the overall conference champion.
This post was edited on 7/17/08 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 7/17/08 at 1:07 pm to LSUTANGERINE
well only problem with round-robin in SEC is theres so many good teams in conference they would beat up on each other, and nobody would play for NC, USC dominates in Pac 10 because their head and shoulders above everyone else.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 1:08 pm to cvdo06
Key phrase from the article:
After USC handily beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl and Oklahoma lost to LSU in the national title game, the media exploded and began lobbying for the Trojans' share of the title, which they received from AP voters.
Nuff said.
After USC handily beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl and Oklahoma lost to LSU in the national title game, the media exploded and began lobbying for the Trojans' share of the title, which they received from AP voters.
Nuff said.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 1:08 pm to MetryTyger
Newsflash, guys.
USC played EIGHT conference games in 2003. They didn't adopt the round-robin until 2006.
USC played EIGHT conference games in 2003. They didn't adopt the round-robin until 2006.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 1:13 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
It is a actually better than a super conference where there is a CG, but everyone does not play each other. You could have a 6-6 or 7-5(pre C CG) East Champ who lost to the 12-0 (pre C CG) West Champ by 28 points in the regular season be the overall conference champion.
Being a 6-6 or 7-5 pre CG team would be very difficult, but not outside the realm of possibility if the entire division just completely sucked beyond words.
Of course, that happened to Tennessee in 2001, when they were 10-1 and lost to an 8-3 (I think) LSU team they had already beaten during the regular season.
But I think possibilities like that are what make the conference championship game exciting and appealing.
This post was edited on 7/17/08 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 7/17/08 at 2:14 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
quote:
Explain to me how LSU could play 11 conference games ???
Never said they could. Explain to me how the PAC-10 could have a conference championship game? They can't.
I have never ever said that they should.
The Pac 10 doesn't need one, they only have 10 members (unlike 12 in the SEC), so they just play the round robin schedule (as you're well aware of.)
I wish we COULD play all 11 SEC opponents, but I don't see how unless they lengthen the season or not play any OOC games (or just 1), which would suck.
Anyway, good luck to the Trojans....
Posted on 7/17/08 at 4:30 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
What if LSU had to play every team in the SEC?
In 2003, USC didn't have to play every team in the PAC-10 hoss.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 4:32 pm to GoBigOrange86
quote:
LSU had one loss to a bad Florida team. USC had one loss to a bad Cal team.
Florida >>>>>>>>> Cal
Posted on 7/17/08 at 4:34 pm to xiv
quote:
Actually, when it came down to it, Oklahoma was 12-1 vs. one of the top 5 schedules in the country
based on the retarded formula the BCS used at the time. North Texas at 9-4 counted as a tougher foe for OU than Alabama did at 4-9. SOS based on the record of you opponents and your opponents opponents is garbage with out it being weighted by rankings or soemthing.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 4:39 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Florida >>>>>>>>> Cal
Remember we are talking about 2003 and Ron Zook was coaching Fla that year. Florida was better, but not as much as last year or 06 for example.
While Florida was a better opponent, our offense was shutout at home. At best losing in 3 OT at Cal and losing at home by 12 is a wash.
2003 BCS CG should have been USC-LSU. If the current system was in place them, that would have been the matchup and I guarentee, no LSU fans would be arguing OU deserved to be in the title game in that case.
Posted on 7/17/08 at 4:53 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
At best losing in 3 OT at Cal and losing at home by 12 is a wash.
NO its not!! DUDE!! Cal was MUCHbetter than FLA in 2003!! BOTTOM line is that LSU WOULD HAVE BEATEN USC in the NC game!!!
Posted on 7/17/08 at 4:55 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
What if LSU had to play every team in the SEC?
SEC teams LSU did not play in 2003:
Vanderbilt (2-10)
Kentucky (4-8)
Tennessee (10-3, finished #15/16)
Total: 16-21 (.432, 1 ranked)
I would gladly have played any or all three of those instead of having to play Georgia a second time, IN ATLANTA.
SEC teams LSU did play in 2003:
Florida (8-5, #24/25)
Georgia (11-3, #6/7)
Georgia again (11-3, #6/7)
Auburn (8-5)
Ole Miss (10-3, #13/14)
Alabama (4-9)
Mississippi State (2-10)
South Carolina (5-7)
Arkansas (9-4)
Total: 68-49 (.581, 4 ranked)
Also played:
Oklahoma (12-2, #3)
Finally, though...
What relevance does the question even have, since USC didn't play every team in the Pac Ten, either? They didn't play Oregon (8-5, .615)
Posted on 7/17/08 at 5:05 pm to dukke v
quote:
NO its not!! DUDE!! Cal was MUCHbetter than FLA in 2003
PJ, I respect Cal, they were a good team, but they went 8-6 that year, and hey won their bowl. Florida was ranked. I'd give UF the edge on talent. IMO, losing at home by 12, when your offense is shut our is a "worse" loss (i know that's horrible grammar) than losing triple OT on the road.
quote:
BOTTOM line is that LSU WOULD HAVE BEATEN USC in the NC game!!!
I agree, especially in NOLA,
Posted on 7/17/08 at 5:21 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
It is a actually better than a super conference where there is a CG, but everyone does not play each other.
Even worse is the Big 10+1. In 2002 tOSU and Iowa were both 8-0 in confernce.
I like the current PAC format, its much better than CCG IMO. But with a 12 team league, it would be impractical.
Page 5 of 9
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News