Started By
Message

re: Why I hate only 4 teams in the playoffs

Posted on 11/10/15 at 8:22 pm to
Posted by Roses of Crimson
Sweet home Ala-bam
Member since Nov 2014
1631 posts
Posted on 11/10/15 at 8:22 pm to
quote:

It was written in stone before football was even invented that BAMA was the only team that would be given a Mulligan.


96 Florida says howdyyyyyy
Posted by Tiger Voodoo
Champs 03 07 09 11(fack) 19!!!
Member since Mar 2007
21788 posts
Posted on 11/10/15 at 9:51 pm to
quote:

96 Florida says howdyyyyyy




First off, get the frick off of this board you Gump Bitch.

Second, you and your cousin fricking fanbase can shove that Florida 96 year up your cleft assholes.

Florida played Florida State again because there was no one else for them to play due to the Bowl Coalition tie ins.

The Sugar Bowl would have killed to have FSU play undefeated Arizona State or even 1 loss Ohio State, but the Big 10 and Pac 10 were excluded because of their Rose Bowl lock.

Nebraska was a lock at #2 over Florida until they lost the Big 12 CG to a 4 loss Texas team.


See that 96 Rematch had as much to do with the creation of the BCS as the split title in 97 did.

The only holdout to a "playoff" was the idiotic BIG/PAC 10 Rose Bowl situation. But after their 2 champs got snubbed for not participating in the Coalition, they realized they had to get over their Rose Parade fetish. The dialogue started that off season and was finalized after the Michigan Nebraska split when they arranged that the traditional Rose matchup would always occur unless one of their champs was 1 or 2, or they were hosting the NCG.


See, the BCS wasn't just created to pick the "two best teams". It was created to ensure that conference Bowl tie ins would not prevent ALL of the best teams from having an opportunity to " settle it on the field".

Your inbred tide already had their chance in 2011, and if your coach and ESPN hadn't manipulated the votes, the system would have rightly selected the other conference champ to have their opportunity at #1, which would have put OSU against LSU, to "settle it on the field", ensuring the most teams had a chance to cross conference lines to make a claim for #1.


So frick you and Florida 96, both of those shams spurred paradigm shifts in the postseason process, because they both were not the fair outcome.

At least in 96 the Sugar Bowl had no other option. In 2011, there was another option, and it was a robbery of LSU, OSU, and all the fans that made it one of the least watched BCSCGs ever that Alabama was given that Mulligan.


So ends the lesson. Go to bed, Junior
This post was edited on 11/10/15 at 10:09 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram