- 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: Now that USCw has lost, media will just find a new overrated anti-SEC darling
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:48 am to NawlinsTiger9
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:48 am to NawlinsTiger9
quote:The season where we dominated literally every team on our schedule? The media didn't do that.
in case you had forgotten the entire 2011 season.
1
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:49 am to genro
No, 9-6 wasn't domination. But 21-0 was.
Therefore, we dominated every single team we played.
Therefore, we dominated every single team we played.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:49 am to genro
quote:Welcome to College Football. The great thing about it, is there's always time for redemption. Early in the season, you take a tough loss on the road to a conference rival, and you can win your way back to a Championship afterwards. Maybe not a conference Championship, but a National Championship.
Enjoy your time in the spotlight until you lose.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:51 am to genro
Preferential? Someone gets voted in every year, the process is not inherently preferential.
Name me another BCS conference champion who was left out in favor of a division runner-up, and then we can at least cite precedent.
Name me another BCS conference champion who was left out in favor of a division runner-up, and then we can at least cite precedent.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:53 am to genro
Not arguing that you didn't. Stop bringing up irrelevant shite, bro.
You still wouldn't have gotten there without being a darling. And deep down, you fricking know it.
You still wouldn't have gotten there without being a darling. And deep down, you fricking know it.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:53 am to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
Name me another BCS conference champion who was left out in favor of a division runner-up, and then we can at least cite precedent.
2001: Nebraska didn't win its division, and faced Miami in the NC. Oregon, with only 1 loss, won the Pac-10 and didn't play for the NC.
Dumbass.
This post was edited on 9/16/12 at 5:56 am
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:54 am to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
Name me another BCS conference champion who was left out in favor of a division runner-up, and then we can at least cite precedent.
Kansas State, Big 12 Champs 2003.
OU gets in to the BCSCG.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:57 am to NawlinsTiger9
Naw, there is no question that Okie St got the shaft in favor of the gumps. The TV ratings made sure that something like that won't happen again.
ESPN will lose a shite-ton of money on another re-match, so it won't happen.
More good news.... LSU will skull frick the gumps in Death Valley this year so I'm not really worried about it.
ESPN will lose a shite-ton of money on another re-match, so it won't happen.
More good news.... LSU will skull frick the gumps in Death Valley this year so I'm not really worried about it.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 5:57 am to loweralabamatrojan
And who would you say is more of a media darling? Oklahoma or Kansas State? Nebraska or Oregon? (Remember this is 2001 Oregon)
This post was edited on 9/16/12 at 6:00 am
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:02 am to NawlinsTiger9
The media was right. That's your problem. The media had to make a decision. One team was going to get in and one wasn't. Either way, it would've been preferential treatment.
In the case of 2011, they were proven correct and that burns you. Because you wanted an easy BCSNC game.
In the case of 2011, they were proven correct and that burns you. Because you wanted an easy BCSNC game.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:05 am to genro
I mean, you're bitching about the media, but in this case how can you possibly disagree with them?
Do you really think Okie State was better than Alabama? You can't possibly think that.
Assuming you're not THAT crazy, it means you agree with the media's assessment. So, what's the problem? Oh yeah. You lost.
Do you really think Okie State was better than Alabama? You can't possibly think that.
Assuming you're not THAT crazy, it means you agree with the media's assessment. So, what's the problem? Oh yeah. You lost.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:07 am to genro
quote:
Do you really think Okie State was better than Alabama? You can't possibly think that.
I'm not sure that is the point of the NCG selection though. Not getting into this pissing contest but Okie State had a better resume than Bama, and bama lost at home.
and yes Bama was the best team last year; doesn't mean they belonged in the NCG
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:07 am to genro
You're reading far too much into my motivation as if it has any bearing on this argument.
I notice you didn't answer my questions; I will do it for you. Oklahoma and Nebraska are clearly the blue bloods over K state and Oregon, just like Bama was over Okie State.
fricking fascinating.
I notice you didn't answer my questions; I will do it for you. Oklahoma and Nebraska are clearly the blue bloods over K state and Oregon, just like Bama was over Okie State.
fricking fascinating.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:09 am to Buckeye06
quote:A 1-loss Big XII team has a better resume than a 1-loss SEC team?
Not getting into this pissing contest but Okie State had a better resume than Bama
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:14 am to genro
You think a team that lost at home deserved another chance against the same team they lost to, at a neutral site, for all the marbles, after they didn't even play in their conference championship game... is anything else really that laughable to you?
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:14 am to genro
Bama didn't win their division. Bama didn't win the SEC. Bama had no business in the title game, regardless of the outcome.
At best, you should only have half a share of the 2011 title.
At best, you should only have half a share of the 2011 title.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:17 am to NawlinsTiger9
You don't have to answer this, and I know you wont, but really think about it. If the exact same scenario was presented to you before the season, but you didn't know which one, if any, was your team, would you still have felt the way you do about it then that you do now?
Rationalization is a powerful son of a bitch.
Rationalization is a powerful son of a bitch.
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:17 am to NawlinsTiger9
quote:Cool story bro.
Oklahoma and Nebraska are clearly the blue bloods over K state and Oregon, just like Bama was over Okie State.
None of that is relevant. I can't believe you think it is.
I think it was because OU and Nebraska have humans as nicknames, while K-State and Oregon have animals.
Bama was voted in because they were perceived as better than Okie State. Maybe some voted Bama because of their "blue-blood" status. Maybe some voted Bama because they like Saban. Some (like you own damn coach) voted Bama because of conference ties. Some absolutely 100% certainly voted Bama in because they objectively thought they were better.
You're an absolute almost-bigoted fool to cast this wide stereotypical net that every single voter voted Bama in because of their intangible status among the CFB elite. That's asinine.
You can't possibly know the voters' motivation for voting Bama in. I can't believe you act like you do. Again, it sounds almost bigoted. Like you have some inferiority complex grudge against Alabama.
Lastly, and most importantly, it's a moot point. You don't know why Bama was voted in, but it doesn't fricking matter why. Bama proved it didn't matter by destroying your LSU asses in New Orleans. Whatever the reasons people voted for Bama, they were proven right in their vote.
This post was edited on 9/16/12 at 6:21 am
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:19 am to NawlinsTiger9
quote:Abso-fricking-lutely. I've always said an all-SEC National Title would be fantastic.
You don't have to answer this, and I know you wont, but really think about it. If the exact same scenario was presented to you before the season, but you didn't know which one, if any, was your team, would you still have felt the way you do about it then that you do now?
2009: They were already saying that Bama-Florida could have a rematch if Texas lost in their CCG.
We were prepared for it, even if we won. I was okay with it. In the end, Texas won (barely)
Who the hell doesn't want an all-SEC National Title? It's fricking awesome.
This post was edited on 9/16/12 at 6:20 am
Posted on 9/16/12 at 6:21 am to genro
You wouldn't know who any of the teams were. That was the point.
Page 2 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News