Entitled Teams/Media Hypocricy/BCS Formula/Con Champs- Hilarity Ensues UPDATE OP

Yeah yeah. "I'm a dumbass EZE Tiger Fan. I boo my team at TS. This post is TL; DR". Now that this is out of the way for our white trash base of fans. Also, I will add updates when I can to the OP for the next couple of weeks detailing this "phenomenon" just so everyone can get a good laugh and further mock fans from entitled schools like Bama. No doubt their fans will be here for over a month detailing their "right" to play us again, calling us "scared", etc. This is going to be fun for me, anyway. If you don't like it, don't read it.

So, help me out here.

In 2003, when LSU was slated to play OU, it was a travesty, according to the media, that USC wasn't in the game because Oklahoma had lost their last game against KSU. "Oklahoma did not win their conference, therefore, they did not deserve a bid in the BCSNCG". The media beat this dead horse for weeks, crowned USC "co-champs" and basically flushed LSU's win down the toilet. Hell, most still consider USC the "real" champs that year.

In 2004, the CFB world watched as the BCS formula was "simplified" so the humans could have more control over the computers again. The world was right, you see, because now humans could use their knowledge of watching games over the "strength of schedule" that the computers weighed in. A team like USC could play two or three teams with a winning record all year, and it was now OK to put them in a title game over a team with an equal record who played an NFL schedule.

What they didn't mention was that we went back to the very thing we tried to get away from when the BCS was established: The media bias that runs rampant in college football for the ENTITLED teams. Yes, we all know who they are: Bama, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, USC, Oklahoma, etc.

Well well, here we are again in 2011 and look who is lucky enough to be at the epicenter of BCS controversy again: LSU. The team the media loves to pretend to love.

So now, these same media morons who in 2003 chanted "you must win your conference to participate in the title game" have all magically changed their tune? Sure. Why not. After all, they hold the majority of control over the "simplified" formula. Why? Well, because once again, one of their traditional ENTITLED DARLINGS needs a break: Bama.

God forbid some podunk school like Oklahoma State (too bad you have STATE at the end of your title...if you were just OU, you'd be a lock...unless you didn't win your conference and the team you needed to pass had the largest media market in CFB) will make it over a team that has already lost to LSU.

Also, in 2011, in order for MichSt, Wisc, VaTech, Clemson, Oregon, or Houston to play in a BCS Bowl game...not THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME, but a plain ole BCS bowl game, what will they have to do? Oh yeah: WIN THEIR FRIGGIN CONFERENCE.

I'll be honest with you, at this point, I do think Bama is the #2 team. I just think the hypocricy put on display by the media needs to be pointed out. shite like this is why the BCS was implemented in the first place, but once again, with the media back in control, we see that some schools don't play on the same playing field as others when it comes to "special considerations" like rankings and title games. And don't give me shite as an LSU fan over 2007. The REASON we were put in the NCG was because WE WON THE SEC.

Another example, just so I'm not just picking on darling Bama is, last night, had ND beat Stanford, they would be playing in a BCS game. All they had to do was beat a few teams with winning records and voila! Payoff! LSU (along with dozens of other schools) was a 10 win team last season. Were they in a BCS game like Notre Dame? No. They had a different road to hoe to "earn" it.

Long story short, the BCS was originally created to prevent this type of bias for the entitled teams. In 2004, to benefit an entitled team, the formula was changed and now, we are back to where we were before. Except now, the media can blame their frickery on the BCS system.

Go ahead and put Bama in the game.

As far as I'm concerned, the BCS shouldn't exist anymore anyway. The entitled teams will always find a way in no matter what.

Entitled teams need not play tough schedules: save that for the other teams to "earn their right" into the game. Let the entitled teams lose the big games at home, schedule nobody, and still make the game. That's what the media is going to do anyway, and they've proven they will corrupt any system that tries to fix it.

The next week will be amusing to me. I don't watch shows like Gameday. I quit in 2003. I will watch it for the first time this coming Saturday so I can see the hypocricy and get a laugh out of it.

Then, I will come here and read posts from Bama fans discussing what they "deserve". As good as LSU is right now, I hope we never become one of those schools. I prefer playing a tough schedule, pounding other teams, hearing the media make excuses for the losers, pick us to lose again next week, and then be proven wrong again. Makes it that much sweeter.

11/28 - Hilarity Hypocricy Update:
So, let's go back to 2003 again. Another point I forgot in my rant that is valid with USC's split "title".

So, USC lost to Cal in OT, which was another argument the media started....

"USC was not beaten in regulation".

Great, that can be said for both OK State AND Bama this year. Good, we agree...

BUT, the difference is that Bama lost to #1 LSU, and OU lost to ISU....THIS is the current rebuttle from the media to protect the entitled Bama squad.

Well, remember Cal in 2003? Yeah, that team ended the season with 8 wins and got skull fricked in their bowl game. Why isn't Oklahoma State getting the same treatment today?

One of many articles that detail this travesty of not winning a conference

In case you were wondering, the bleacher report TODAY is perfectly cool with Bama getting the rematch. LOL. What a change in just one year, huh?

Oh, Never Mind. It's all Good. It's Bama!

This is going to be fun updating this post all week.