re: Espn: Sizing up the SEC resumes

LSU is doing great things. bama is just a little bit better. Key to stopping the invasion is to beat them in Death Valley in 2014. I really hope this doesn't become a Cholly Mac experience (God rest his soul). CLM will beat little nicky this coming year.

6 teams, nfl style, 2 byes. Use the bcs system to determine the teams

quote:

---

Their marquee win? Oklahama? Please tell me you're not talking about Oklahoma.

---

Alabama will beat the dog shite out of Oklahoma.

The problem with all this is the idea if you go undefeated in a BCS conference you deserve to be the NCG or final four no matter how much stronger a one loss teams schedule turns out to be. OSU who hasn't played hardly anyone in the top twenty for two seasons would be in the BCSCG if not for a final game loss.

Until football returns to a valid SOS approach, we will see shite like we almost saw this season.

quote:

---

Until football returns to a valid SOS approach, we will see shite like we almost saw this season.

---

coming up with a system that satisfies people with the results is a moving target. The BCS formula has been changed as many years as it has been left unchanged.

Sometimes the "best" team as praised by the national media has the weakest schedule of the teams being considered. Sometimes the "best" team as praised by the national media has the fewest number of quality wins of the teams being considered.

The goalposts get moved regularly because generally speaking people have larger preconceptions about programs than they do about other things like the value of winning your conference, having quality wins on your schedule, etc.

quote:

---

Why is Bama more deserving than MSU or Baylor? All have 1 loss, actually Baylor and MSU both have better wins than Bama. Both won their conference. Bama didn't even win their division. Why is Bama entitled?

---

Many people are missing this.

They look at how Alabama dismantles inferior-talented teams, and go "wow, they are as good as an NFL team.. almost".

The last 3 years Alabama has choked in its biggest games, yet it seems like everyone in the media elevates them to the NC game/playoffs, regardless if Alabama wins the SEC.

And you can switch it up... what if USCw had hired Saban or Harbaugh or whoever, and would be the media darling "powerhouse"? How would non-USC fans view this if USC would not win the PAC 12, yet sneak in the NC/playoffs every year? Can you imagine the outrage from most SEC fans?

quote:

---

No. $ drives everything in college football, the 'narrative' exists to gin up interest in what would provide the most $. After a few years of having a 4 team playoff consisting of teams entirely from the old confederacy, national interest in the playoff would die off. In order to maximize revenue from a play off, interest in the play off would almost have to be national in scope. You need to have Pac 12 and Big 10 fans tuning in to watch at least the first round. The 'narrative' would come in to rationalize leaving out what some might consider play off worthy teams.

---

Nobody said anything about 4 teams from the confederacy (although we all know which team from a Confederate state would get the biggest benefit of doubt.) My point is that as long as it's possible to included non-champions at the expense of champions, then the sticker on the side of the helmet matters more than it should. And in any case of an argument, the standard to judge against will be the AP poll, because it's a manifestation of the echo chamber.

I think it's hard to deny that under that situation, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska and Southern Cal would get undue consideration compared to Oklahoma State, Baylor, South Carolina, Michigan State, Stanford, Mizzou, and Arizona State, all of whom are in the current top 13. It has already happened in 2011, when an Oklahoma State team who had won their conference and beaten more top-25 teams was left out for Alabama.

And yes, dollars are part of why the media echo chamber creates a narrative.

Even so, I thought it was irresponsible journalism for ESPN to run the "LSU & Alabama" crawl for a game they would end up televising during a game that included a team that still had an argument on a network they are affiliated with. "Pay no attention to this game, because the team that is smacking down their top rival (who is in the top-10) still has no chance no matter how many points they score. Their game can't match the effort shown in the greatest loss ever." I guess that's the privilege of being the "Worldwide Leader".

GEAUX TIGERS

quote:

---

only LSU and Alabama deserved to play for the title that year

---

I disagree. LSU beat Bama on the road. OSU won the big 12 and only had 1 loss. Bama might have been better than OSU but OSU deserved the opportunity. LSU beat Bama on the road, played in the SEC championship game and got rewarded by playing Bama in NCG. Makes no sense at all.

quote:

---

consisting of teams entirely from the old confederacy

---

If you unduly pimp or take pride in confederacy, you shouldn't be surprised when others don't reciprocate your passions.

quote:

---

I disagree. LSU beat Bama on the road. OSU won the big 12 and only had 1 loss. Bama might have been better than OSU but OSU deserved the opportunity.

---

Correct.

The ulitmate goal is not to pitch the "two best teams" in a final game. Rather, it's to have one team that's demonstrated (that means on the field) superiority to the exclusion of the most number of other teams.

quote:

---

LSU had already crushed the winners of all four major bowls that year, there really wasn't another credible opponent.

---

OSU had beaten four top 25 teams. More than Alabama. We had beaten Alabama in Alabama. There is something wrong when a team doesn't play well enough to reach their conference CG but gets to play in the NCG when you are talking about a one game system.