- 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: strength
Posted on 8/20/08 at 2:22 pm to Helmethead
Posted on 8/20/08 at 2:22 pm to Helmethead
Hmm...I was thinking that you were pointing out that LSU, unlike Georgia, did not make a fuss about being left out of the BCS title game in 2006 despite being a team that was playing well near the end of the season.
If that was the case, I was simply going to mention that LSU had no argument for a BCS title game in 2006 no matter which way 'ya slice it because two teams in front of them had better records.
Regular season alone has determined at least one participant in every single one of those years you listed. The Big 10 and Pac-10 don't have championship games...therefore, the regular season is all that determines their participation.
Claiming that Georgia should not have gone to the BCS title game without winning the SEC is a valid argument. However, Georgia also had a few other arguments...like where they were ranked at the end of the year and the fact that they had the exact same record as LSU at the end of the year. Things that LSU did not have in 2006. So, I think Georgia was a little more justified in raising a little complaint.
If that was the case, I was simply going to mention that LSU had no argument for a BCS title game in 2006 no matter which way 'ya slice it because two teams in front of them had better records.
quote:
If the regular season alone determined the participants in the BCS Championship...
Regular season alone has determined at least one participant in every single one of those years you listed. The Big 10 and Pac-10 don't have championship games...therefore, the regular season is all that determines their participation.
Claiming that Georgia should not have gone to the BCS title game without winning the SEC is a valid argument. However, Georgia also had a few other arguments...like where they were ranked at the end of the year and the fact that they had the exact same record as LSU at the end of the year. Things that LSU did not have in 2006. So, I think Georgia was a little more justified in raising a little complaint.
2
Posted on 8/20/08 at 2:32 pm to Dawg151
quote:
Regular season alone has determined at least one participant in every single one of those years
yet somehow, they required TWO participants each time, crazy i know, but a trend i see carrying on in the future.
quote:
like where they were ranked at the end of the year
in '06 Michigan was #2 after the reg season, got jumped after the conference championship weekend, and yet somehow wasn't screwed. This is kind of the same.
quote:
the fact that they had the exact same record as LSU at the end of the year.
no they did not, LSU played an extra game, and won. Comparing LSU and UGA's seasons last year is really tough to do, it is almost like MLB. LSU had a 1/2 game lead when both were finished playing.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 2:32 pm to Dawg151
quote:
LSU had no argument for a BCS title game in 2006
And the Dogs had no argument in 07, They couldn't even play in the SECCG, so therefore no reason to even think of themself to be in the hunt. You should have to win your Conf before you get that shot.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 2:47 pm to TigersWon
I guess I'll let the criticism begin. Ya know, I don't whole heartedly believe the conf champion should automatically get the nod. If TN had beat LSU in SECCG, I would have been a supporter of UGA going to the ship...even though they did not win their conference. If Ark beat UF in the '06 SECCG (as unlikely as it would have been), I'd be for LSU representing the SEC in the NC, even though we didn't win the conference...although there were some other one-loss teams who would have beat us out.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 2:59 pm to zack7552
quote:
If TN had beat LSU in SECCG, I would have been a supporter of UGA going to the ship.
I can't agree with this. Tennessee handled buisness on the field they murdered Georgia so how would you justify this. This would have been like VT going to the NC last year instead of us.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 3:21 pm to Fearthehat0307
Some people were in favor of VT going (not me), but certainly the computers. I can't see TN going b/c there were other two-loss teams out there with more of a case...plus Cal humiliated them. But, if TN beat LSU...I don't think it would have been enough for TN to overcome UGA's high ranking and they likely would have gone. They would have been the most complete SEC team at the end of the season. If UF lost in '06, I would have supported an LSU bid over ARK/UF even though we lost to UF and didn't play in the SECCG. JMO.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 4:01 pm to zack7552
Well, here's the real deal...
I've pretty much been done with what happened last season since the end of January. Sure, I was ticked off at the time, but what happened in the past is the past as far as I'm concerned, and Lord knows it was a subject that was beaten to death.
The fact of the matter is that if everyone is completely honest about it, they would have done exactly what each set of fans did if the roles had been reversed. If Georgia was in LSU's situation last season and LSU was in Georgia's, Georgia fans would be saying, "You gotta win the conference game to play in the BCS title game." LSU fans would be saying they got unfairly jumped in the polls. As much as each side has made their argument, it would be totally opposite if the situation were reversed.
Now, both sides can claim that they wouldn't change their minds and that their argument would remain the same, but we all know that's a lie. You're going to support whatever helps your team out in the end. If the same thing happens in the future and either fan base finds itself on the opposite side, I guarantee you'll see the opposite arguments being made. It's actually kind of funny, really.
I've pretty much been done with what happened last season since the end of January. Sure, I was ticked off at the time, but what happened in the past is the past as far as I'm concerned, and Lord knows it was a subject that was beaten to death.
The fact of the matter is that if everyone is completely honest about it, they would have done exactly what each set of fans did if the roles had been reversed. If Georgia was in LSU's situation last season and LSU was in Georgia's, Georgia fans would be saying, "You gotta win the conference game to play in the BCS title game." LSU fans would be saying they got unfairly jumped in the polls. As much as each side has made their argument, it would be totally opposite if the situation were reversed.
Now, both sides can claim that they wouldn't change their minds and that their argument would remain the same, but we all know that's a lie. You're going to support whatever helps your team out in the end. If the same thing happens in the future and either fan base finds itself on the opposite side, I guarantee you'll see the opposite arguments being made. It's actually kind of funny, really.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 7:17 pm to Malcolm
That is just TUlane's coach spouting off. I believe he was exaggerating with the 75 number. THere is only 85 scholarship players and if you count say 10 walk-on or so that bench 400+ I still doubt 65 scholly players bench that much, too many corners and recievers in the mix.
Posted on 8/20/08 at 7:21 pm to MJRuffalo
MJR - Maybe you're right, but in my post, I was quoting the article/reporter, not Tulane's coach.
This post was edited on 8/20/08 at 7:23 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News