Started By
Message
re: What is more important - Weeks ranked as AP #1 or National Championships
Posted on 12/11/18 at 1:46 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Posted on 12/11/18 at 1:46 pm to Draconian Sanctions
USC was undefeated in the regulation for 2003.
They beat the big x champ.
They even shut out 2 common opponents with LSU on the road (Arizona and Auburn).
The AP voted them #1.
Was LSU undefeated in regulation in 2003?
Did LSU beat a conference champ?
Did LSU beat more ranked teams?
Did LSU shut out any opponents in 2003?
These aren't difficult questions. And they all point to USC #1. It happened sweetheart.
They beat the big x champ.
They even shut out 2 common opponents with LSU on the road (Arizona and Auburn).
The AP voted them #1.
Was LSU undefeated in regulation in 2003?
Did LSU beat a conference champ?
Did LSU beat more ranked teams?
Did LSU shut out any opponents in 2003?
These aren't difficult questions. And they all point to USC #1. It happened sweetheart.
1
Posted on 12/11/18 at 1:47 pm to Korin
quote:I keep waiting for the NCAA to recognize the Colley national championship and put UCF in.
The NCAA also recognizes Arkansas for 1964 though. Can't have it both ways.
... But that would work to Bama's advantage. Even though we would have to share 2017 w/UCF & 2012 w/ND & 2011 w/Okla St., Bama would gain 2016 w/Clemson.
Posted on 12/11/18 at 1:48 pm to MSHawg1
Weird troll considering Upig has never been awarded an AP NC 
Posted on 12/11/18 at 1:53 pm to meansonny
You seem to be having trouble, none of those questions matter anymore because the BCS was put in place to weigh and answer those questions for us. All the power conferences and their members agreed to the formula used for the 2003 season, USC is included in that group. The result was that LSU and Oklahoma were selected to play in the National Championship game. USC was not. It’s really just that simple. What the polls voted after the fact is irrelevant because they didn’t play the same role in a post BCS world as they did before. They were no longer national championship selectors they were parts of the overall formula used to select the participants in the Championship Game.
Posted on 12/11/18 at 4:06 pm to swinetime
Glad to see you can stay on topic. 
Arkansas doesn't have shite to offer...oh wait, are y'all still good at track?
Arkansas doesn't have shite to offer...oh wait, are y'all still good at track?
Posted on 12/11/18 at 4:26 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
None of this matters, USC’s 2003 claim is as legitimate as UCF’s last year for reasons I’ve already explained. Even less so actually considering the BCS was the creation of the power conferences of which USC was a member. Everybody knew the rules going in, they only get the run for that title because they’re USC.
Your own athletic dept recognizes USC.
Posted on 12/11/18 at 5:23 pm to Korin
Being diplomatic in 1 press release don’t mean shite
This post was edited on 12/11/18 at 5:23 pm
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News