- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
The rule that should have been put in place after OU in 2003
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:48 pm
If you dont win your conference, you cannot participate in the BCS NCG.. easy, done and done.
Puts all this rematch talk to bed forever.
Puts all this rematch talk to bed forever.
18
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:49 pm to Xenophon
So true. I've been saying this since that happened.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:50 pm to Xenophon
I agree. If Stanford and OSU lose, it's like the game yesterday was meaningless. What a game of the century, huh?
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:52 pm to oompaw
Well, it's not a rule.
Not scared but it won't happen. What they didn't tell you on the show is that Bama will be sitting at home while other contenders will be playing.
Not scared but it won't happen. What they didn't tell you on the show is that Bama will be sitting at home while other contenders will be playing.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:54 pm to Xenophon
Here's a scenario for you:
LSU loses SECCG.
Winner of Stanford/Oregon loses PAC12CG.
1-loss B1G team loses B1GCG.
Clemson loses to USCe then beats VT in ACCCG
Who goes? Obviously OU/OSU, but who's the other?
LSU loses SECCG.
Winner of Stanford/Oregon loses PAC12CG.
1-loss B1G team loses B1GCG.
Clemson loses to USCe then beats VT in ACCCG
Who goes? Obviously OU/OSU, but who's the other?
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:54 pm to cattus
quote:
Not scared but it won't happen. What they didn't tell you on the show is that Bama will be sitting at home while other contenders will be playing.
Yeah we'll get to play in our own conference title game for the right to play bama again.
How fricked up is that?
Posted on 11/6/11 at 8:55 pm to cattus
That would be a stupid rule.
The goal of the BCS National Championship game is to match the "two best teams in the country".
How about trying to have some original thoughts instead of just regurgitating what you've heard the funny man say on the radio there, Nancy!
The goal of the BCS National Championship game is to match the "two best teams in the country".
How about trying to have some original thoughts instead of just regurgitating what you've heard the funny man say on the radio there, Nancy!
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:00 pm to lsusa
quote:
That would be a stupid rule.
No, it wouldn't be a stupid rule at all. It would make perfect sense in the current structure. It's not like the two teams that have not won their conference game and went on to play in the NC game performed well.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:01 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
How fricked up is that?
my point was that voters don't like idle teams
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:02 pm to cattus
quote:
my point was that voters don't like idle teams
And my point wasn't. So...what are you saying here?
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:06 pm to Tiger Authority
there would be such an epic meltdown across the country if any and I mean any undefeated teams that includes houston were left out of the MNC. and two SEC teams played in it.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:09 pm to Xenophon
That would only be an ok rule if every conference has a championship game. But not all conference champions are decided the same way, so you can't penalize the conferences that have a CG.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:12 pm to LSUJuice
quote:
That would only be an ok rule if every conference has a championship game. But not all conference champions are decided the same way, so you can't penalize the conferences that have a CG.
But before the Pac expansion they played everyone, so it wasn't that important for them to have a title game.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:13 pm to rpg37
It is not meaningless if we win the SEC title...
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:17 pm to Xenophon
BCS includes human voters and computers to try to prevent something outrageous from happening. Enough voters would have to want a rematch for it to happen. Bama's computer rankings can put them #2 but if 2/3 of the formula (human polls) don't think bama deserves another crack at us (which they don't), it won't happen. The only thing the BCS won't protect you from is stupid voters who have no uniformity on what the best way to vote is. Herbstreit is all about vote for the 2 best teams to be 1 and 2 (Bama has the best loss to date). The flaw there is that you can still reward a team that might be the second best team when they already had a chance and take a chance away from a team that hasn't blown it yet.
My opinion is that since Bama couldn't beat us at their place at night in a game for all the marbles, they have given up their argument. Gotta go with another 1 loss team, but theoretically that rule shouldn't be necessary. They just need to educate the voters on the right approach and it would take care of itself.
My opinion is that since Bama couldn't beat us at their place at night in a game for all the marbles, they have given up their argument. Gotta go with another 1 loss team, but theoretically that rule shouldn't be necessary. They just need to educate the voters on the right approach and it would take care of itself.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 9:20 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
But before the Pac expansion they played everyone, so it wasn't that important for them to have a title game.
Ahh, but in that case, a 3-way 1-loss tie gives the (former) Pac-10 three champions. The SEC, (former) Big 12, and ACC have CG's and have only one champion.
So let's say two SEC West teams are tied with 1-loss. The 1-loss SEC West team that beat the other goes to the SECCG. Let's say that team loses to a multi-loss team from the East. The remaining 1-loss SEC West team did NOT win its conference.... BUT in the former Pac-10, you can have a three-way tie at the top, in which all teams are considered "conference champion." So the SEC in this case would be penalized by its divisions if there was a rule that you had to win your conference championship.
This post was edited on 11/6/11 at 9:22 pm
Posted on 11/6/11 at 10:03 pm to LSUJuice
Not all teams must play in a conference championship game (take OU and Okie State for example).
Three of the best teams in the country right now are in the SEC AND in the same West division.
(See current top 8 BCS rankings.)
Only 1 of those West division teams will play in the SEC Championship game.
If LSU wins out and Bama finishes at #2 in the final BCS ranking, you would want #2 Bama to be passed over, even though they lost only to #1, in OT by 3 pts, and then earned the #2 ranking in the final BCS poll?
You would rather skip over the #2 team and select a #3 OKLA or Okie State, who would be the Big 12 Champ, but never had to win a conference championship game?
Sorry, that makes no sense at all.
The BCS title game pits BCS #1 vs BCS #2, because that is the final decision of the pollsters and the computers as to who the two best teams in the county are.
It does not matter whether both are conference champs or if both are from the same conference.
The only thing that matters is that each has earned one of the top two spots in the final poll of the season, in accordance with the official BCS formula.
Three of the best teams in the country right now are in the SEC AND in the same West division.
(See current top 8 BCS rankings.)
Only 1 of those West division teams will play in the SEC Championship game.
If LSU wins out and Bama finishes at #2 in the final BCS ranking, you would want #2 Bama to be passed over, even though they lost only to #1, in OT by 3 pts, and then earned the #2 ranking in the final BCS poll?
You would rather skip over the #2 team and select a #3 OKLA or Okie State, who would be the Big 12 Champ, but never had to win a conference championship game?
Sorry, that makes no sense at all.
The BCS title game pits BCS #1 vs BCS #2, because that is the final decision of the pollsters and the computers as to who the two best teams in the county are.
It does not matter whether both are conference champs or if both are from the same conference.
The only thing that matters is that each has earned one of the top two spots in the final poll of the season, in accordance with the official BCS formula.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 10:14 pm to purple passion
quote:
If LSU wins out and Bama finishes at #2 in the final BCS ranking, you would want #2 Bama to be passed over, even though they lost only to #1, in OT by 3 pts, and then earned the #2 ranking in the final BCS poll? You would rather skip over the #2 team and select a #3 OKLA or Okie State, who would be the Big 12 Champ, but never had to win a conference championship game? Sorry, that makes no sense at all.
Counter argument to that: Alabama would have to beat LSU one time to win the National Championship.
LSU, on the other hand, would have to beat Alabama twice (one time being in their home stadium), AND play an additional game to get there.
Both sides have their pros and cons...
Posted on 11/6/11 at 10:16 pm to purple passion
quote:
purple passion
We know the rules. We just disagree with them. Who cares if they play a conference title game? Who's the conference champion? That's what matters, not whether their conference is established such that it has a title game or not. That's dumb.
Posted on 11/6/11 at 10:18 pm to cattus
Once the championship games are all over and voters look at everything they'll realize the reality of how dumb it would be to put a team that didn't even win it's own division (much less it's conference) and didn't beat LSU when they played them earlier.
Then again this is the frickin' BCS so who knows
Then again this is the frickin' BCS so who knows
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News