Argument against a rematch

That's right. The argument is for 2nd place. Not first. Alabama should not have another chance to play for first if LSU wins out.

The Gumps do not deserve a rematch.

Suppose LSU wins out and makes it to the BCSNCG. Our record will be 13-0 and the Tigers will have defeated EIGHT ranked teams including number two and number three.

Suppose the Gumps win out. Their record will be 11-1 and they will have defeated four ranked teams and lost to one.

Bama cannot possibly earn the right to a rematch. Every human poll understands that, but the computers do not. LSU went into their house and beat them. Got that? BAMA LOST and there should be consequences to losing. They don't deserve a rematch. There is a reason why we keep score in football games. Boise would be more worthy.

Having said all that everyone agreed to the BCS format. It is what got us into the championship games of 2003 and 207. We agreed to it before the season began and we will have to live with the consequences.

I just look at 2006 and see the biggest argument already established. I honestly think the bashing of the game (it was sloppy and boring) is an attempt to avoid the rematch; let LSU face someone else. While the message sent is insulting to us on the surface (that we are sloppy and have no offense), I agree with the gist- we do deserve a different opponent.

In general, I happen to agree Alabama is probably the team with the best chance to beat us. But we just went to their house and won. I also think Oregon might be as good as anyone else left to choose from, but we beat them too. Thus, and again, find us someone else.

I understand the official wording of the BCS is to match up the 2 best teams to play for the national title, but the original intent was due to the fact that the best teams from each conference never played each other, due to bowl tie-ins. The LSU team that faced Nebraska in the Orange wasn't the best the SEC had to offer. The Michigan team that lost to Auburn and Bo Jackson wasn't the best Big 10 team.

The BCS was made to let the best teams that wouldn't otherwise play each other face off. LSU against Bama? Saw that already. LSU won on the road. That should count for something, as should (if it comes down to 1 loss teams) the fact that LSU has already beaten Oregon too.

The overall college football world would be opposed to a rematch when it comes down to it, and so would the Sugar Bowl- who plays in that game?Remember, there will be no 3rd SEC team to get in, so that means the Sugar would get absolute garbage. Boise, yes, could be undefeated and likely one pick, with a crowd in the low 4 digits making the trip; against an also-ran from a college with no ties to the bowl or region. Maybe the loser of the Oklahoma-OSU game, or the Stanford-Oregon loser. Yippee, the Sugar might be half full, and struggle against reruns of "2 and 1/2 Men" on tv.

Nope, the Powers That Be will want LSU playing someone new, someone they can tout as being worthy of breaking the SEC stranglehold on the title, not concede it to the conference before the 1st bowl is played. And the Sugar will want Alabama playing someone interesting too.

and in 06, fl skulldrugged oh,
and sc skulldrugged mich.