- 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
A few reasons why Ok State got screwed...and why the human polls suck.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:22 am
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:22 am
(A) 5 coaches poll voters had Oklahoma State 4th in the coaches poll and 1 (Troy Calhoun) had them at 5th.
(B) 16 Harris voters put Ok State lower than 3rd (8 votes of 4th, 5 votes of 5th, and 2 votes of 6th) whereas Bama only had one vote lower than 3rd (4 from Todd Husak)
(C) out of the 22 votes in which Ok St. was voted worse than 3rd all but 2 voted Stanford ahead of Ok St. This makes no sense for a number of reasons:
........1) Schedule strength: Ok St=8th, Stanford=64th
........2)top 25 wins: Ok St.=5, Stanford=none (Bama has two)
........3) Ok St. is the champion of the best conference in the country (statistically), Stanford didn't win their division.
........4)wins over bowl bound teams: Ok St.=7, Stanford=3 (Bama has 3)
........5)Overall offensive ranking: Ok St.=3, Stanford=11 (all those Pac-12 defensive juggernauts must be lowering Stanford's rating)
........6)Points allowed per game: Ok St.=5.31, Stanford=5.25. Top 25 offenses played: Ok St.=7, Stanford=3. Teams played ranking lower than 60th in total offense: Ok St.=2, Stanford=5
........7)Respective losses: Ok St=in double overtime, at Iowa St., after Iowa St. had a bye the previous week. Stanford= in regulation, at Stanford, by 23 points, Oregon did not have a bye. (This is the only instance in which Stanford is arguably better than Ok St., but IMO it seems like a tie. Oregon is ranked 5th, but the team ranks are not the only statistic that should be considered important. Regardless this isn't enough to justify Stanford as a better team than Ok St.)
(D) Saban got a vote but Gundy didn't. (tell me that isn't garbage)
E) ESPN has been trying to promote a LSU, Bama rematch since Bama lost because the game had the 2nd highest ratings of all time.
(B) 16 Harris voters put Ok State lower than 3rd (8 votes of 4th, 5 votes of 5th, and 2 votes of 6th) whereas Bama only had one vote lower than 3rd (4 from Todd Husak)
(C) out of the 22 votes in which Ok St. was voted worse than 3rd all but 2 voted Stanford ahead of Ok St. This makes no sense for a number of reasons:
........1) Schedule strength: Ok St=8th, Stanford=64th
........2)top 25 wins: Ok St.=5, Stanford=none (Bama has two)
........3) Ok St. is the champion of the best conference in the country (statistically), Stanford didn't win their division.
........4)wins over bowl bound teams: Ok St.=7, Stanford=3 (Bama has 3)
........5)Overall offensive ranking: Ok St.=3, Stanford=11 (all those Pac-12 defensive juggernauts must be lowering Stanford's rating)
........6)Points allowed per game: Ok St.=5.31, Stanford=5.25. Top 25 offenses played: Ok St.=7, Stanford=3. Teams played ranking lower than 60th in total offense: Ok St.=2, Stanford=5
........7)Respective losses: Ok St=in double overtime, at Iowa St., after Iowa St. had a bye the previous week. Stanford= in regulation, at Stanford, by 23 points, Oregon did not have a bye. (This is the only instance in which Stanford is arguably better than Ok St., but IMO it seems like a tie. Oregon is ranked 5th, but the team ranks are not the only statistic that should be considered important. Regardless this isn't enough to justify Stanford as a better team than Ok St.)
(D) Saban got a vote but Gundy didn't. (tell me that isn't garbage)
E) ESPN has been trying to promote a LSU, Bama rematch since Bama lost because the game had the 2nd highest ratings of all time.
This post was edited on 12/6/11 at 2:50 am
12
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:30 am to CheeseTiger251
Oakland state?
ETA: okay you corrected it
ETA: okay you corrected it
This post was edited on 12/6/11 at 3:15 am
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:37 am to SpOrk
I don't remember Ok State playing Iowa.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:43 am to CheeseTiger251
I should mention the coaches in (A) were:
Nick Saban- obvious bias
Missouri's Gray Pinkel - team is leaving Big 12 for the SEC
Stanford's David Shaw- ranked own team ahead of Oak St.
Duke's David Cutcliffef- born in Birmingham, AL; attended the University of Alabama; and was a student assistant to Bear Bryant.
The last two apparently have no bias, which leads me to believe Troy Calhoun is an idiot or addicted to drugs.
Nick Saban- obvious bias
Missouri's Gray Pinkel - team is leaving Big 12 for the SEC
Stanford's David Shaw- ranked own team ahead of Oak St.
Duke's David Cutcliffef- born in Birmingham, AL; attended the University of Alabama; and was a student assistant to Bear Bryant.
The last two apparently have no bias, which leads me to believe Troy Calhoun is an idiot or addicted to drugs.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:44 am to CheeseTiger251
I mean they lost to Iowa State...
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:44 am to SohCahToa
Iowa St. my bad
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:53 am to CheeseTiger251
1. OK State has 4 Top 25 Wins, not 5. Stanford has 1, but USC is ineligible. USC is ranked higher in the one poll they're eligible in than any team OK State beat. (BTW Bama has 3 Top 25 wins, not 2)
LINK
2. Can you prove if OK State had gotten third place votes from those 22 coaches, they would've been 2nd in the BCS?
3. Your attempt to equalize Stanford and OK State's lone losses is a hysterical spin job.
4. Good to see some of you are still whining about this.
LINK
2. Can you prove if OK State had gotten third place votes from those 22 coaches, they would've been 2nd in the BCS?
3. Your attempt to equalize Stanford and OK State's lone losses is a hysterical spin job.
4. Good to see some of you are still whining about this.
This post was edited on 12/6/11 at 2:54 am
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:56 am to Lazy But Talented
quote:
I mean they lost to Iowa State...
The Saints lost to the Rams. Should they not make the playoffs? Are they not still a good team?
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:57 am to Lazy But Talented
quote:
9-6
January 9, 2012
Posted on 12/6/11 at 2:58 am to genro
No no. We'll score more touchdowns then silly and maybe y'all will make some field goals? 
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:03 am to CheeseTiger251
The votes fell this way bc of the bama conspiracy. They wanted it. They got it. Now the hb wants and and he will take it.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:17 am to TheSexecutioner
quote:
TheSexecutioner
GWAR.....I'm gonna make an alter named maggots
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:24 am to genro
quote:
January 9, 2012
I bet your guys worked on field goals....good thing cuz your offense wont even know what the turf in the end zone feels like
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:35 am to genro
quote:
January 9, 2012
LSU claims at least a split National Championship that day... Funny you would bring it up.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:37 am to LaBornNRaised
quote:
LSU claims a split National Championship
Take your AP. Have fun with it. Don't care.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:49 am to genro
quote:
quote: LSU claims a split National Championship Take your AP. Have fun with it. Don't care.
I find that odd that an Alabama fan "doesn't care" about a national championship that isnt really legitimate.
There are far worse polls that have crowned you champion that are celebrated with flags in Bryant Denny.
#bamalusional
Posted on 12/6/11 at 3:58 am to tiger1014
Well that was a predictable response.
Apparently you care about it too.
Again, go ahead. Claim your AP NC, fly flags, give out rings. Still don't care.
quote:
I find that odd that an Alabama fan "doesn't care" about a national championship that isnt really legitimate.
quote:
LSU claims at least a split National Championship that day
Apparently you care about it too.
Again, go ahead. Claim your AP NC, fly flags, give out rings. Still don't care.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 4:16 am to CheeseTiger251
On one hand, yeah, you feel that OSU may have gotten shafted. Then again, if they would have taken care of business there would be no argument. If LSU wouldn't have gotten in to the NCG in 2007 we would have known it was our own fault... and call me crazy, but I didn't see anything like Felix Jones and Darren McFadden on ISU.
If it was eve debatable that they were better than bammer, OSU would have been no debate at all. Anyone who actually watches college football knows that Bama is a much better team than they are. And since there is no clear cut criteria that coaches have to use in their poll, the perception of who is the 2nd best team can trump who has the second most impressive resume.
Then there's the whole 2004 thing. Auburn got left out in favor of a Big 12 team, and I'm pretty sure all involved wished afterwards that they would have went with the SEC team. I doubt that Auburn would have beat SC that year, but they surely wouldn't have been run off the field the way that OU was.
At the end of the day, do I believe that Bama deserved a chance to play for the national title? No, I do not. However, everyone that deserved to play LSU proved on the field that they didn't deserve to play LSU either. If you don't like the fact that LSU has to play Bama, here's who you should be mad at...
Stanford- if they hold serve at home against Oregon, they would have coasted to the NCG. Hell, if they kept it even reasonably close, perhaps, they still make the game.
Oregon- after running Stanford out of the picture they decide to prove they don't belong in a rematch by allowing SC to beat them at home when everything was on the line.
Oklahoma State- all they had to do was beat one of the worst teams in their conference, but they failed to do so. LSU was force fed that they didn't need to win the SECCG because they were already in. Did we lay down? Nope.
Oklahoma- If they don't lose to Baylor it would have likely set up winner of the OSU game gets in to the NCG. By losing they basically made the victory over them less impressive and carry less weight.
Wisconsin- if they stop one of those teams from completing a last second pass against them they would have been the #2 team in the nation.
Before blaming the coaches or Bama, I would blame those teams for proving on the field that they were not only not as good as the Tide, but that they couldn't put up an unquestionably better case than the Tide.
If it was eve debatable that they were better than bammer, OSU would have been no debate at all. Anyone who actually watches college football knows that Bama is a much better team than they are. And since there is no clear cut criteria that coaches have to use in their poll, the perception of who is the 2nd best team can trump who has the second most impressive resume.
Then there's the whole 2004 thing. Auburn got left out in favor of a Big 12 team, and I'm pretty sure all involved wished afterwards that they would have went with the SEC team. I doubt that Auburn would have beat SC that year, but they surely wouldn't have been run off the field the way that OU was.
At the end of the day, do I believe that Bama deserved a chance to play for the national title? No, I do not. However, everyone that deserved to play LSU proved on the field that they didn't deserve to play LSU either. If you don't like the fact that LSU has to play Bama, here's who you should be mad at...
Stanford- if they hold serve at home against Oregon, they would have coasted to the NCG. Hell, if they kept it even reasonably close, perhaps, they still make the game.
Oregon- after running Stanford out of the picture they decide to prove they don't belong in a rematch by allowing SC to beat them at home when everything was on the line.
Oklahoma State- all they had to do was beat one of the worst teams in their conference, but they failed to do so. LSU was force fed that they didn't need to win the SECCG because they were already in. Did we lay down? Nope.
Oklahoma- If they don't lose to Baylor it would have likely set up winner of the OSU game gets in to the NCG. By losing they basically made the victory over them less impressive and carry less weight.
Wisconsin- if they stop one of those teams from completing a last second pass against them they would have been the #2 team in the nation.
Before blaming the coaches or Bama, I would blame those teams for proving on the field that they were not only not as good as the Tide, but that they couldn't put up an unquestionably better case than the Tide.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 4:23 am to genro
quote:
January 9, 2012
YEP cannot wait GUMP, you gonna have a long year for sure.
Posted on 12/6/11 at 4:25 am to Mulat
He called me a gump and he put it in all caps.... EPIC
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News