re: 2011 Alternative Scenario

quote:

---

I'm not the one whom introduced "not taking care of business"

---

Actually, you were. This is you:

quote:

---

No. Several USC teams were left out of the BCSNCG because USC couldn't take care of business against a conference it owned and a weak schedule.

---

And I mocked that statement. I continue to mock it. Especially when we look at Bama's schedule in 2011.

quote:

---

Don't take my arguments as implying that losing or winning your conference is irrelevant; that's not my stance. My stance is that winning your conference is rarely what it's blown up to be.

---

It is the single most important factor. It is the only thing that every team can control entirely by their own performance at the season's start. Even winning all your games doesn't guarantee a title. Ask 2004 Auburn.

Your attitude is one that was caused by the BCS. I'm willing to bet you're young, probably under 25 but definitely under 30. You only know the BCS era. And it is an era that has consistently devalued the conference championship until now it is virtually valueless. It frankly, pisses me off. Conference championships are the whole point. In a way, they are more valuable than national titles, which are called mythical for a reason.

quote:

---

Any bias aside, Oklahoma State was not definitively better than Alabama; the matchup wasn't settled on the field.

---

The inverse is also true. Bama was not definitively better either. So, we are left to looking at what teams actually did. And Okie St's resume was objectively better. Thus, they were #2 and should have played for the title. The fact Bama didn't win their conference and already lost to LSU at home is just icing on the cake.