- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 2011 Alternative Scenario
Posted on 7/30/13 at 3:08 pm to Gardevoir
Posted on 7/30/13 at 3:08 pm to Gardevoir
quote:
I'll put it this way: Oklahoma State had 2 wins over team that finished the season ranked:
quote:
Alabama had one
All that other stuff you typed is irrelevant
It is offensive that the voters just assumed that based on such a feeble resume that Alabama was deserving of a rematch when another team like OSU, whose offense was at least as dominant throughout every game they played as Alabama's defense was, did not even deserve a chance.
The BCS was created to ensure that conference bowl tie ins would not prohibit a matchup to determine a champion.
The LSU Alabama matchup had already occurred. It was settled on the field. There was no need for the BCS to give us that matchup.
Oklahoma and the Big 12 were the ones that the BCS was designed to protect in such a scenario, and it was not allowed to because of a few voters that had an agenda and dishonestly placed OSU as 5 or 6 on their ballots to ensure that Alabama would get the Rematch.
Those voters committed a fraud on the system, and it is a travesty that will live in infamy IMO.
I know, I know, butthurt, 21-0 yada yada.
Alabama was a better team than LSU in 2011. I can admit that.
Which makes our victory over them in Tuscaloosa all the more impressive, and yet another mark against their resume that they did not take care of business the way a champion should.
This post was edited on 7/30/13 at 3:11 pm
5
Posted on 7/30/13 at 3:17 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
It is offensive that the voters just assumed that based on such a feeble resume that Alabama was deserving of a rematch when another team like OSU, whose offense was at least as dominant throughout every game they played as Alabama's defense was, did not even deserve a chance.
The BCS was created to ensure that conference bowl tie ins would not prohibit a matchup to determine a champion.
The LSU Alabama matchup had already occurred. It was settled on the field. There was no need for the BCS to give us that matchup.
Oklahoma and the Big 12 were the ones that the BCS was designed to protect in such a scenario, and it was not allowed to because of a few voters that had an agenda and dishonestly placed OSU as 5 or 6 on their ballots to ensure that Alabama would get the Rematch.
Those voters committed a fraud on the system, and it is a travesty that will live in infamy IMO.
Was Oklahoma State's schedule really that frightening? For them maybe, but for Alabama or LSU no. How many elite defenses did Oklahoma State face? 0. The Big 12 hasn't fared well against SEC teams lately. They score well below their average and give up more points than other SEC defenses would allow.
The BCS has failed several times before. I don't understand why people pass off whether or not Alabama or Oklahoma state was the better as irrelevant. I'm pretty sure that LSU would have beaten Oklahoma State by the double digits. Oklahoma State hadn't seen a defense even remotely comparable to Alabama or LSU's. Your elite Special Teams would have given them problems too.
Another thing to consider is that some teams lose games but wind up much better later on. Also, the ranking system is flawed. There are many ignore factors in college football, and that's why I think the 4-team playoff won't fix much. 2010 Alabama finished with 3 losses and would not have made a 4-team playoff; however, they were capable of beating anyone towards the end of the season, and the team that played in the Capital One Bowl was healthier and more mature than the regular season team that lost 3 games.
This post was edited on 7/30/13 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 7/30/13 at 3:25 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
I know, I know, butthurt, 21-0 yada yada.
Alabama was a better team than LSU in 2011. I can admit that.
Which makes our victory over them in Tuscaloosa all the more impressive,
quote:
and yet another mark against their resume that they did not take care of business the way a champion should.
You lost me there with "the way a champion should". Must I bring up 2003 and 2007 LSU? While you didn't get a rematch in either title game, you most certainly did not control your destiny from start to finish; you needed help, just like anyone else that didn't finish undefeated, with a strong schedule, or voter bias.
Posted on 7/30/13 at 4:04 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Alabama was a better team than LSU in 2011. I can admit that
False. LSU was undefeated in 2011. Alabama was second in their division, and didn't play for conference title. LSU was the best team in the conference. They already printed the shirts.
Outside of 1/9 I have never seen an objective argument as to why Bama was the better team during the regular season. Margin of victory was similar vs common opponents, but Bama didn't play anyone else worth a damn outside of the SEC West.
Bama rode into the championship using LSU as a proxy for what could have been. The media sold it, and the human polls bought it.
LSU flat out shite the bed during the NCG in 2012. It is what it is.
Posted on 7/30/13 at 4:13 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Oklahoma State had 2 wins over team that finished the season ranked:
Actually, it was 3 (4 if you count Stanford in the bowl game). They beat #13 Baylor, #15 KSU, and #16 OU. And while they didn't play any great defenses, they did play some great offenses. Baylor was 4th in the nation in scoring. OSU held em to 24 points. OU was 10th. They scored 10. A&M was 11th, and they at least scored 29.
Also, Bama might say that they only beat one ranked team, but they beat two good teams (Auburn and PSU) who were both in the "also receiving votes" category. Well, so did OSU (Mizzou and Texas).
OSU had more quality wins, won the 2nd toughest conference in the nation, and their one loss was a road game on a short week after a campus tragedy decided in overtime on a controversial call. The only thing OSU lacked was a brand name. If it was Oklahoma, and not Oklahoma St, they play for the national title with that resume.
Posted on 7/30/13 at 4:15 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Alabama was a better team than LSU in 2011. I can admit that.
False as frick
LSU proved on the field every week by navigating through one of the toughest schedules in recent memory. Bama lost at home to their only competition all year.
Were they the better team 1/9? Yea I'll give them that, but to say they were a better team than LSU in 2011 is just ignorant
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News